Mircea Eliade’s The Sacred and the Profane: the Nature of Religion was interesting to read. I derived from it that the Sacred is that which is otherworldly, and that our ‘natural’ world is profane. Eliade writes “it is easy to understand that religious man deeply desires to be, to participate in reality, to be saturated with power.” I wasn’t quite sure what Eliade was trying to say with this though. Was he trying to say that man wants to be with the sacred which is power, or that man wants to be with the sacred because it entails power?
I liked the use of basic examples of experience and point of view regarding things such as a sacred stone or tree. A sacred stone from the profane point of view is just a stone, and from the sacred point of view it is, well, sacred. I believe this also plays in to how one experiences the sacred and the profane, profane is familiar, whereas sacred pushes a person to see beyond the surface, It reminds me of how people deal with people, there is a surface layer yet as we get to know others we find that there is more beneath the physical view. If we could glimpse or attempt to perceive/be aware of what is sacred we would be better able to identify the sacred.
Something else that Eliade points to that I found neat was the concept of the profane world, never as purely profane, yet holds a hint of the sacred. I don’t think I’ve seen this point of view presented before. Some could say that this world is nothing but profane, which leaves little hope, however to say that there is a touch of sacred within profane leaves plenty of hope. This ties in with our film ‘Apocalypse Now’ because when there seemingly is an apocalypse going on, there is peace within chaos. The Cambodians (?) that live with Kurtz enjoy life there, even though there are dead bodies, decapitated heads and men draped with machine guns and ammo.
Sunday, January 30, 2011
ReBecca Richardson- Blog 6-film
It took me watching 'Apocalypse Now' three times, to really get into it. I appreciated the transformation of Captain Willard; however the ending with Kurtz left too much unsaid.
The beginning in Saigon showed Willard as a man with little to live for. He wouldn't/couldn't cope with civilization, and eventually he received the assignment he had waited for, only it wasn’t one he necessarily wanted. He was ok killing people, however the idea of killing a man he identified with, made him consider his target. Willard researches Kurtz and becomes more enamored with him as the movie goes on. I think that Willard was fascinated with the fact that Kurtz made his own choices, separate from the desires of the Army. I still don’t quite get it, but Kurtz’s transformation began before he left the army. (I understand this through his want to change positions, from a higher-up, to a lower position.)Willard also wants to understand why. When he finally confronts Kurtz, he doesn’t know what to do with him really, so Kurtz makes Willard a P.O.W.
The interesting turn around is when Willard becomes Kurtz Savior in a sense. Kurtz wanted to die, and Willard’s mission was to kill Kurtz. Willard does not fulfill his mission the way the army wanted him to, he fulfills his mission the way he wanted to, and the way Kurtz wanted him to. Willard wanted to give Kurtz the end he wanted, had Kurtz not wanted death, I am pretty certain that Willard would have stayed there with him, and not returned. I’m not sure though what Kurtz was trying to accomplish. I think he wanted Cambodia to be bombed, and I think that Kurtz had written what he had so it could be an account for his son. Also if I am not mistaken Kurtz implicitly told Willard to tell his story to his son. Not really sure. I had to think really hard to understand this film.
The beginning in Saigon showed Willard as a man with little to live for. He wouldn't/couldn't cope with civilization, and eventually he received the assignment he had waited for, only it wasn’t one he necessarily wanted. He was ok killing people, however the idea of killing a man he identified with, made him consider his target. Willard researches Kurtz and becomes more enamored with him as the movie goes on. I think that Willard was fascinated with the fact that Kurtz made his own choices, separate from the desires of the Army. I still don’t quite get it, but Kurtz’s transformation began before he left the army. (I understand this through his want to change positions, from a higher-up, to a lower position.)Willard also wants to understand why. When he finally confronts Kurtz, he doesn’t know what to do with him really, so Kurtz makes Willard a P.O.W.
The interesting turn around is when Willard becomes Kurtz Savior in a sense. Kurtz wanted to die, and Willard’s mission was to kill Kurtz. Willard does not fulfill his mission the way the army wanted him to, he fulfills his mission the way he wanted to, and the way Kurtz wanted him to. Willard wanted to give Kurtz the end he wanted, had Kurtz not wanted death, I am pretty certain that Willard would have stayed there with him, and not returned. I’m not sure though what Kurtz was trying to accomplish. I think he wanted Cambodia to be bombed, and I think that Kurtz had written what he had so it could be an account for his son. Also if I am not mistaken Kurtz implicitly told Willard to tell his story to his son. Not really sure. I had to think really hard to understand this film.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
ReBecca Richardson -Blog 5-reading
During a class discussion on the Seventh Seal, we questioned the faith of the actor Joseph. He was essentially, one who maintained faith throughout the movie. Where did his faith come from we asked; was he faithful because he had visions or did he have visions because he was faithful? I think we over-looked a key point here, the source of his visions. We the audience saw what he saw, thus we know he was not hallucinating. With this in mind, we are pointed to the readings for clarification. One of the samples I read stood out to me; "The Analysis of Mysterium." Since we can not explain the source of Joseph’s visions it is a mystery, which is indicative of that which is 'wholly other [...] beyond the sphere of the usual, the intelligible, and the familiar' (26). From this point it made me think of how Joseph and his wife were spared from death, and that maybe there was something omniscient that granted Joseph his visions so that he may avoid what he had foreseen (Death). There presents many layers and questions, the first we could peel apart and the latter we would be unable to answer. I found Joseph and his wife extremely interesting, I wouldn’t call it the best movie ever; however I did appreciate how it made me think, as well as the reading that introduced me to new perspectives.
In this class, sometimes I initially don’t understand why the film of the day is considered to have religious undertones. This is true until we talk more about it afterwards. The readings fill in the gaps and lead to deeper thoughts.
In this class, sometimes I initially don’t understand why the film of the day is considered to have religious undertones. This is true until we talk more about it afterwards. The readings fill in the gaps and lead to deeper thoughts.
Megan Wood Blog #2 (outside film)
I, my friends, am a chronic insomniac. Late late at night characteristically involves me lying in bed watching a movie or two until I fall asleep. For a habit such as this, Netflix is a God-send! One night recently, I watched a movie called "Buried" staring Ryan Reynolds:
It's a horror/thriller flick meant to make you angry and challenge your moral compass. Paul Conroy (Ryan Reynolds) is a civilian contractor (nonmilitary truck driver) working in Iraq who, after an attack on his caravan by Islamic terrorists, is buried alive and held for ransom with minimal time, minimal lights, and minimal supplies (to include a cell phone on which he is asked to make ransom videos for the terrorists.. The way the movie is filmed in a "you're-in-the-box-too" style causes the viewer to experience mental discomfort relating to claustrophobic confinement. The story takes place in 2006, deep in the middle of the Iraqi war and terrorism conflicts in the middle east. It challenges the alleged indifference of the American government officials and hostage personnel involved and responsible for situations such as this one to the welfare and life of their employees while away from the comfort and safety of their American lives.
It also challenges the normally inimical reputation of the media by being a lifeline to Paul in it's ability to hold officials responsible for his safety accountable to the truth. that being said, it is a different story for a few phone calls he receives from the contracting company he works for...
Without trying to spoil the movie for anyone, I will say that there are significant points in the film that are emblematic of that transition we've talked about from the mundane to sacred time. Being on the fringes of losing your life tends to make you rethink your purpose, your values, your understandings, and your plan of action if you could reverse your fate.
I WILL say.... the ending was CRAZY. Go see it.
It's a horror/thriller flick meant to make you angry and challenge your moral compass. Paul Conroy (Ryan Reynolds) is a civilian contractor (nonmilitary truck driver) working in Iraq who, after an attack on his caravan by Islamic terrorists, is buried alive and held for ransom with minimal time, minimal lights, and minimal supplies (to include a cell phone on which he is asked to make ransom videos for the terrorists.. The way the movie is filmed in a "you're-in-the-box-too" style causes the viewer to experience mental discomfort relating to claustrophobic confinement. The story takes place in 2006, deep in the middle of the Iraqi war and terrorism conflicts in the middle east. It challenges the alleged indifference of the American government officials and hostage personnel involved and responsible for situations such as this one to the welfare and life of their employees while away from the comfort and safety of their American lives.
It also challenges the normally inimical reputation of the media by being a lifeline to Paul in it's ability to hold officials responsible for his safety accountable to the truth. that being said, it is a different story for a few phone calls he receives from the contracting company he works for...
Without trying to spoil the movie for anyone, I will say that there are significant points in the film that are emblematic of that transition we've talked about from the mundane to sacred time. Being on the fringes of losing your life tends to make you rethink your purpose, your values, your understandings, and your plan of action if you could reverse your fate.
I WILL say.... the ending was CRAZY. Go see it.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
ReBecca Richardson- Blog 4-personal
Recently I went with a friend to see the movie "Season of the Witch." There was a lot of hype to the movie and personally I dig horror/fantasy movies. It reminded me of when we had watched Seventh Seal in class. Both films had main characters who were in the crusades, there was the plague, and of course there is a witch who is sentenced to trial. Of course there were differences to the movie as well; (I will try not to give much away in case folks are interested in checking it out). Nicholas Cage realizes that the church is fighting for the voice of man rather than the voice of God, and he declares that he pledged allegiance to God and not to the church. To him this is clear, yet to the church they can see no division. He deserts the crusades, and is branded as a deserter. He travels with a friend, who deserted the crusades with him and they are arrested. The cardinal gives the proposition that all charges will be cleared if they transport the 'witch.' The deal is made, and yet Cage views the girl as a child and is compassionate towards her. Can you also see how I related this to Seventh Seal? I thought it would be fun to bring it up.
As for the quality of the movie, it reminded me of Brothers Grim; it had a great idea, lots of hype, yet when you actully watch it, it's not as exciting. Great visual effects for both movies though. There is a twist at the end of "Season of the Witch," yet it didn't make me feel 'like wow didn't see that coming.' The ending wasn't necessarily predictable, however it wasn't a big surprize either. You would really have to watch it to understand what I mean. I was kind of disappointed, and for me it definitely wasn't a buyer.
As for the quality of the movie, it reminded me of Brothers Grim; it had a great idea, lots of hype, yet when you actully watch it, it's not as exciting. Great visual effects for both movies though. There is a twist at the end of "Season of the Witch," yet it didn't make me feel 'like wow didn't see that coming.' The ending wasn't necessarily predictable, however it wasn't a big surprize either. You would really have to watch it to understand what I mean. I was kind of disappointed, and for me it definitely wasn't a buyer.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Willie Mears: Blog 1
It’s always funny when you’re in class and there is a discussion going on and you have literally no idea what the heck anyone is talking about. When those situations happen, and believe me it does quite often, I am torn between how to act. On one hand I could avoid eye contact with the professor and try to not get called on, a much safer bet but then your teacher knows you’re oblivious, in a sense you are rolling over and admitting defeat. The other, much bolder option, is to go the exact opposite route and look super invested in the discussion, look as though you understand it in its entirety (relative to your classmates) but don’t talk because you are too busy thinking of concepts way above the rest of your class. It’s a gutsy move to say the least. Now I was faced with total obliviousness in class last Monday after watching The Seventh Seal, and when I say obliviousness I mean it. There may as well not have been subtitles. But watching that Swedish masterpiece made me realize a few things, I think that as visual effects have gotten better, movies have gotten worse. Movies today are full of either amazing visual effects or crude humor; at least the ones I am interested in are, and are beyond simple in their plot and meaning. Take 300 for example, extremely popular movie and pretty sweet effects, but not a whole lot of stuff going on below the surface. Now I can’t be certain, but I’m willing to bet there wasn’t a whole lot of latent narrative going on with Leonidas and the gang. On top of that it was one of the most historically inaccurate movies ever made, so not only does it not make you think, it makes you dumber by giving you inaccurate information. That, I think, is why I disliked The Seventh Seal at first, I have become accustomed to watching movies that don’t make me think. Visual effects are awesome, but they are making me dumber. I bet Lodnidas doesn’t even know how to play chess.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Megan Wood- Blog #1 (outside reading)
If anyone knows me, they understand the importance of music in my life. As this is a film class, I find it necessary to give a bit of attention to the importance of music in the films we watch, as they contribute to our individual experiences of the viewing process. In his book The Soul of Cinema: An Appreciation of Film Music, Larry Timm (2003) states that a movie without music is like a bath without water. Something very crucial is missing! There is an endless array of favors that music in general does for the films it enhances. I've recently spent some time entertaining myself with a few silent films lent to me by a friend (and film aficionado). In silent films in particular, music is something in which the history and fame of the movie industry can attribute itself.
A very basic, general role that music played for the silent movies in their beginning was ‘to provide additional emphasis to the moods and action on the screen’ (Timm 2003, p. 58). If you are to watch a screen project images in silence, you would become bored and inattentive. The music, while mostly unbeknownst to you, is what MAKES the scenes of a movie jump out, it brings characters to life, carries you into the situation, allows your imagination to fill. The music swells when your heart needs to, mellows when you should be. It allows you to interpret what the director was trying to convey without even knowing it.
Who came up with the idea that music could (and should) enhance action in film? Interestingly enough, music was added not for the effect it had on the picture itself, but as a way of "blocking out the unwanted mechanical sounds of the projector" (Timm 2003, p. 58). As it turns out, movie makers found that the music could vastly improve the quality and enjoyability of a silent film. However, a poor score at the same time could completely shipwreck a good film.
In this way, the role of a “good score” for a movie -according to musicians who accompanied the silent movies with live music- is as follows: It has been found that the score for a silent film makes up forty to fifty percent of the film’s entertainment value (Gaston). Because of this, directors know it is a key factor to have a good score in the movies they produce in order for it to be a success to the audience. The goal of the director in placing a score for a film is to make the music epic and feel-able, yet invisible to the audience, undetectable to the subconscious.
You may find it interesting that particular instruments were chosen for particular genres or for particular scenes in silent films. Initially, the piano was used to cover up the noisy projectors, and it was a simple instrument to have in the theater, and did good enough job in relating mood. Soon, when audiences wanted more and as technology improved and theaters were enhanced, full orchestras were available in the pits of movie theaters to preserve history like never before. Eventually, organs were also used not only to provide music, but to produce sound effects like thunder, gunshots, police sirens, and bird calls while movies were progressing into the sound era.
In the progressions of music in cinema, the base of music was to create mood. This type of theater music was eventually given a name, called “mood music”. Mood music was used to help convey and amplify the moods the director wishes to represent in each scene on the screen. During silent film production, some actors used a musician on set to play a song to get them in the right mood, such as asking them to play a certain song that could bring them to tears for a sad scene.
Music has been such an epic part of cinema entertainment from the beginning, and will continue to make progressions in its art while maintaining its history in the wonderful music that entertained audiences and animated pictures so many years ago. For the purpose of this class and as we ponder the question of sacred films, I would say that we should pay attention to the uses of music in film that help us to reach those emotional highs and lows which contribute to our understanding and experience of a given film. Think about the films you've seen that left a strong impression on you emotionally, or even spiritually- was the music a factor in that experience? The idea of sacred films, I would argue, has just as much to do with our journey through the viewing process and what is involved in that process as it does with the content itself...
A very basic, general role that music played for the silent movies in their beginning was ‘to provide additional emphasis to the moods and action on the screen’ (Timm 2003, p. 58). If you are to watch a screen project images in silence, you would become bored and inattentive. The music, while mostly unbeknownst to you, is what MAKES the scenes of a movie jump out, it brings characters to life, carries you into the situation, allows your imagination to fill. The music swells when your heart needs to, mellows when you should be. It allows you to interpret what the director was trying to convey without even knowing it.
Who came up with the idea that music could (and should) enhance action in film? Interestingly enough, music was added not for the effect it had on the picture itself, but as a way of "blocking out the unwanted mechanical sounds of the projector" (Timm 2003, p. 58). As it turns out, movie makers found that the music could vastly improve the quality and enjoyability of a silent film. However, a poor score at the same time could completely shipwreck a good film.
In this way, the role of a “good score” for a movie -according to musicians who accompanied the silent movies with live music- is as follows: It has been found that the score for a silent film makes up forty to fifty percent of the film’s entertainment value (Gaston). Because of this, directors know it is a key factor to have a good score in the movies they produce in order for it to be a success to the audience. The goal of the director in placing a score for a film is to make the music epic and feel-able, yet invisible to the audience, undetectable to the subconscious.
You may find it interesting that particular instruments were chosen for particular genres or for particular scenes in silent films. Initially, the piano was used to cover up the noisy projectors, and it was a simple instrument to have in the theater, and did good enough job in relating mood. Soon, when audiences wanted more and as technology improved and theaters were enhanced, full orchestras were available in the pits of movie theaters to preserve history like never before. Eventually, organs were also used not only to provide music, but to produce sound effects like thunder, gunshots, police sirens, and bird calls while movies were progressing into the sound era.
In the progressions of music in cinema, the base of music was to create mood. This type of theater music was eventually given a name, called “mood music”. Mood music was used to help convey and amplify the moods the director wishes to represent in each scene on the screen. During silent film production, some actors used a musician on set to play a song to get them in the right mood, such as asking them to play a certain song that could bring them to tears for a sad scene.
Music has been such an epic part of cinema entertainment from the beginning, and will continue to make progressions in its art while maintaining its history in the wonderful music that entertained audiences and animated pictures so many years ago. For the purpose of this class and as we ponder the question of sacred films, I would say that we should pay attention to the uses of music in film that help us to reach those emotional highs and lows which contribute to our understanding and experience of a given film. Think about the films you've seen that left a strong impression on you emotionally, or even spiritually- was the music a factor in that experience? The idea of sacred films, I would argue, has just as much to do with our journey through the viewing process and what is involved in that process as it does with the content itself...
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
ReBecca Richardson: Blog 3-film
In the film 'The Seventh Seal' I was focused more so on the concept of questioning what happens after death? Despite belief or non-belief the only evidence for action beyond death is decay of a corpse and the continuation of time. This leads into the question of faith and knowledge, the same issue that Antonius Block struggled with. I think this hits home for many people because, at one point in life we question faith, and thus search for evidence. (Evidence can vary depending on person considering perception makes reality.) The actors (Joeseph and Mary) seemed to carry the faith more often. Although Joeseph had the visions and his wife did not believe him, nor could she see what he saw; Joeseph still had faith in his visions. He did not think he was not crazy, otherwise he would have stayed and considered that he may be crazy; and thus would have shared the same fate as the others. Adding to this, his wife did not see as he did yet she went with her husband and had faith in him.
It is interesting that the movie is called 'The Seventh Seal' when that part of the Bible is speaking of the final judgement of man. Death is fulfilling that judgement, and despite the various occupations or positions in the social system of life, Death did not descriminate. I was bothered that there was no reason given for the deaths. Death made a man fall out of a tree; couldn't the actor have climbed down and prevented it? Also in the end the people who were to be claimed by Death were not killed. There was no evidence of death, it made me wonder if it should be assumed that they had the plague, even though they showed no signs? There were many layers to chew on in this movie, and it made me think.
It is interesting that the movie is called 'The Seventh Seal' when that part of the Bible is speaking of the final judgement of man. Death is fulfilling that judgement, and despite the various occupations or positions in the social system of life, Death did not descriminate. I was bothered that there was no reason given for the deaths. Death made a man fall out of a tree; couldn't the actor have climbed down and prevented it? Also in the end the people who were to be claimed by Death were not killed. There was no evidence of death, it made me wonder if it should be assumed that they had the plague, even though they showed no signs? There were many layers to chew on in this movie, and it made me think.
ReBecca Richardson: Blog 2-reading
Robert Jewett's piece, "Stuck in Time: Kairos, Chronos, and the Flesh in Groundhog Day," inspired deeper thinking in me. Originally I tried to understand Groundhog Day through the character Phil's perspective. Jewett made it a bigger issue. He focuses on the inferences of flesh and spirit from a Pauline perspective. What struck me the most however was the quote he took from Richard Corliss, which stated "most folks' lives are like Phil's on Groundhod Day: a repitition, with the tiniest variations, of ritual pleasures and annoyances. Routine is the metronome marking most of our time on earth. Phil's gift is to see the routine and seize the day." This qoute was important because beforehand I was looking at the movie in an external sense; seperate from myself. Corliss makes that sense an internal one. We as humans do not have the ability to redo our days to perfect them, we have only the present. Sometimes we pass through life and do not make the most of it; like existing and not living. Our lives can become repititous through rountine, to the point that we no longer appreciate what life is, and what it means. Also any pleasure brought about through flesh is always temporary, even drugs wear off. Pleasure through the spirit can transcend the flesh and bring purpose to one's life. Thus I appreciate Jewett's enlightenment.
ReBecca Richardson: Blog 1-film
The film Ground Hog day fascinated me because of the character of Phil. He was not a very nice person, yet he was given the chance to make his life better. Also Phil never verbally asked why is this happening (at least to my recollection) he only asked what is going on. He discovered the what adter the first repeated day, and he did not elude to a higher power until the old man died and he looked to the sky, as though it might answer him. The events were interesting to watch them unfold, and I believe Phil had said a perfect day could be planned over a few years. I thought it was interesting that the time frame was not pointed to more often than it was. Again the purpose as to why Phil, why at that time, and why was he freed when he was is interesting. Maybe it was because that last day he didn't seem to be thinking of the fact that the day would go on, but rather he actully lived it, rather than partaking in the nothing he had before hand. (Lived it as in appreciated life, and the Nothing as in he didn't have much to live for beyond his own ego.)
Friday, January 7, 2011
welcome post Kip Redick
Enter your blog title and your name in the title area then publish your thoughts.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)