DOCSLIB.ORG

ENGL A270 | HISTORY of FILM Fall 2021 | Tuesday & Thursday, 4:55-6

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ENGL A270 | HISTORY of FILM Fall 2021 | Tuesday & Thursday, 4:55-6 ENGL A270 | HISTORY OF FILM Fall 2021 | Tuesday & Thursday, 4:55-6:10PM Bobet 216 Instructor: Mike Miley | [email protected] | 504.865.2286 Office hours: T/Th 4:15-4:45 PM, 6:15-7:15 PM and by appointment Course Description History of Film is an introduction to the rich and troubling history, impact, and legacy of the motion picture as a commercial narrative art form. The course begins with the creation of the medium in the 1890s and travels around the globe to reach our extremely uncertain and precarious present. Although the medium has developed tremendously throughout the decades due to advancements in style, technology, production, and exhibition, the course will strive to create a sense of continuity, showing how films speak to the legacy of cinema by pointing out the ways in which films influence each other and respond to films of the past. The course will pay particular attention to films and filmmakers who divert from or critique the dominant narratives and forms of film and film history to provide students with a fuller picture of cinema’s capabilities. The goal of the course is not only to educate students on the major figures and developments in cinema but also to expose them to the dynamic field they participate in as spectators and creators to give them the necessary context for a creative and compassionate life in the field. Students who successfully complete the course will be able to demonstrate their knowledge of major events, figures, and films in the history of cinema and will be comfortable with writing about film as a narrative art. Content Disclaimer This class contains content whose depictions of physical violence, racial prejudice, gender discrimination, homophobia, sexual situations, sexual assault, suicide, and other sensitive situations may be problematic or disturbing for some students. Please inform your instructor if you require further information about the course material or if you feel unable to participate in any or all of the requirements of the class. Course Materials Textbooks Corrigan, Timothy. A Short Guide to Writing about Film. Any Edition. Dixon, Wheeler Winston and Foster, Gwendolyn Audrey. A Short History of Film. Third Edition. Rutgers UP, 2013. ISBN 978-0813595122 ($34.95) Films Prerequisite Viewing Star Wars (dir. George Lucas, USA, 1977) Pulp Fiction (dir. Quentin Tarantino, USA, 1994) Course Films All films will be streaming on the course’s Canvas page. Students will be expected to view these films prior to the class meetings to discuss them. Week 1 Early cinema mixtape Week 2 Within Our Gates (dir. Oscar Micheaux, USA, 1920, 79 min.) The Battleship Potemkin (dir. Sergei Eisenstein, USSR, 1925, 75 min.) Week 3 Modern Times (dir. Charles Chaplin, USA, 1936, 87 min.) Un Chien Andalou (dir. Luis Buñuel and Salvador Dali, France, 1929, 16 min.) Meshes of the Afternoon (dir. Maya Deren, USA, 1943, 14 min.) Week 4 Citizen Kane (dir. Orson Welles, USA, 1941, 119 min.) Week 5 Fireworks (dir. Kenneth Anger, USA, 1947, 15 min.) Bicycle Thieves (dir. Vittorio De Sica, Italy, 1948, 93 min.) Week 6 Rashomon (dir. Akira Kurosawa, Japan, 1950, 88 min.) La Jetée (dir. Chris Marker, France, 1962, 28 min.) Week 7 Psycho (dir. Alfred Hitchcock, USA, 1960, 109 min.) Week 8 MIDTERM BREAK Week 9 Cleo from 5 to 7 (dir. Agnes Varda, France, 1962, 90 min.) Daisies (dir. Vera Chytilová, Czech Republic, 1966, 74 min.) Week 10 Black Girl (dir. Ousmane Sembene, Senegal, 1966, 65 min.) The Color of Pomegranates (dir. Sergei Paradjanov, USSR, 1969, 74 min.) Week 11 Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take One (dir. William Greaves, USA, 1968, 75 min.) Killer of Sheep (dir. Charles Burnett, USA, 1978, 80 min.) Week 12 Jeanne Dielman, 23 Quai du Commerce, 1080 Bruxelles (dir. Chantal Akerman, Belgium, 1975, 201 min.) Week 13 Canoa: A Shameful Memory (dir. Felipe Cazals, Mexico, 1976, 115 min.) Week 14 The Watermelon Woman (dir. Cheryl Dunye, USA, 1996, 90 min.) Week 15 Unknown Pleasures (dir. Jia Zhang-ke, China, 2002, 112 min.) Week 16 Taxi (dir. Jafar Panahi, Iran, 2015, 82 min.) Objectives, Assessments, and Grade Percentages While the course is intended as an introduction to the field of film studies, writing is the skill that the course will emphasize most. In addition to being tested on film history, students will be asked to write and revise frequently, with the final goal being a paper where a student demonstrates their understanding of the scope of film history by being able to write a paper that effectively argues for a film’s place in cinema history. Objective Assessment Grade Percentage Ability to craft a cogent argument about a film & its contribution to the art form 4 Short essays 20% Ability to convincingly argue for a film’s importance to cinema by placing it in a historical context Final Paper 20% Ability to independently learn about a topic & communicate that knowledge to one’s peers Presentation (individual or group project) 20% Ability to engage with others in an interrogation of cinema style and history Engagement (Participation + Preparation) 10% Ability to demonstrate understanding of cinema history in a broad context Midterm & Final Exam 10% / 20% Grading scale: 100-90%=A; 92-90=A-;89-87=B+; 86-83=B; 82-80=B-; 79-77=C+; 76-73=C; 72-70=C-; 69-67=D+; 66-60=D; 59% and below = F Description of Assessments Short Essays Based upon your own further reflection and the discussions that we have in class, your understanding of film will deepen, and these assignments give you the opportunity to flesh out your thoughts and refine your writing voice and style. The central question three of these essays should address is: What did we not get to cover about the film that we should have? In other words, please continue our discussion by taking the conversation further, deeper, and to unexplored-but-essential territory. You can choose to discuss the film as a whole, a scene, a performance or element of the film (cinematography, production design, etc.), or an individual shot. Your last short essay will be a preliminary draft of your final paper. These essays should have: - a strong thesis statement that clearly articulates the interpretive claim the rest of the essay will argue. - strong topic sentences that direct each body paragraph. - specific evidence from the film to support your claims. These essays should not: - restate class discussion. - summarize the events of the film. - present/paraphrase outside research—these should be your thoughts. These essays should be double spaced, with the pages numbered in MLA format. These assignments should be around 500 words and are due in class every other week, although the due dates will be staggered, so pay close attention to when yours is due. Please write all of these essays in the same Google Doc that you’ll share with me. Please name the Google Doc “[LastName] [FirstName] Film Essays”. Presentation This can be a group project or an individual project. That’s your choice. While we cannot cover everything that has happened in film history, we can certainly try, and we will get closer to our goal if we share the load. You’ll pitch me on your Top 5 topics from a list I provide you with, along with you (and/or your group’s) reason for why you should be the one(s) to research that topic. From there, you’ll get lost in this area of film history and emerge from your journey ready to share your insights about it, along with its importance to film history, with the rest of the class in the form of a presentation. Your presentation can be delivered either in class or via Canvas. It should last no more than 8 minutes and should tell your peers what you have learned about your topic and what you think they need to know in order to put this topic in the context of film history. This presentation should resemble the type of analysis that we will do in class, so please spend more time on visual/thematic analysis and less on factual information. If there is a specific clip you’d like the class to see to prepare for your presentation, please send it to me in advance so I can share it on Canvas. Final Paper This 1,250-word (minimum) paper will grow out of your presentation. You’ll choose a film related to the topic that you’re covering for your presentation and discuss how the film represents the topic and contributes to cinema. (Films screened in class will not be allowed. Each member of the research group will study a different film.) In the paper, you will analyze the film and its ideas, giving special attention to how it fits into film history as you understand it. This paper is asking you for your thoughtful and considered opinion as well as your unique historical perspective and knowledge; support your opinion with evidence and insightful explanation. Show how this film taps into what came before it and uses its influences to alter the course of film. How is this film a game-changer, and why is its contribution so important for us to understand? Think of this paper as the culmination of what you learned in the class. You may incorporate outside sources into your argument if you like; however, this paper is not a summary of what others have said about the film: your insights into the film and your thoughts on its importance should drive the paper. You are welcome (and encouraged) to start writing this paper as early (and often) as you like.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cinephilia Or the Uses of Disenchantment 2005
    Repositorium für die Medienwissenschaft Thomas Elsaesser Cinephilia or the Uses of Disenchantment 2005 https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/11988 Veröffentlichungsversion / published version Sammelbandbeitrag / collection article Empfohlene Zitierung / Suggested Citation: Elsaesser, Thomas: Cinephilia or the Uses of Disenchantment. In: Marijke de Valck, Malte Hagener (Hg.): Cinephilia. Movies, Love and Memory. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press 2005, S. 27– 43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25969/mediarep/11988. Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Dieser Text wird unter einer Creative Commons - This document is made available under a creative commons - Namensnennung - Nicht kommerziell 3.0 Lizenz zur Verfügung Attribution - Non Commercial 3.0 License. For more information gestellt. Nähere Auskünfte zu dieser Lizenz finden Sie hier: see: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0 Cinephilia or the Uses of Disenchantment Thomas Elsaesser The Meaning and Memory of a Word It is hard to ignore that the word “cinephile” is a French coinage. Used as a noun in English, it designates someone who as easily emanates cachet as pre- tension, of the sort often associated with style items or fashion habits imported from France. As an adjective, however, “cinéphile” describes a state of mind and an emotion that, one the whole, has been seductive to a happy few while proving beneficial to film culture in general. The term “cinephilia,” finally, re- verberates with nostalgia and dedication, with longings and discrimination, and it evokes, at least to my generation, more than a passion for going to the movies, and only a little less than an entire attitude toward life.
    [Show full text]
  • 1997 Sundance Film Festival Awards Jurors
    1997 SUNDANCE FILM FESTIVAL The 1997 Sundance Film Festival continued to attract crowds, international attention and an appreciative group of alumni fi lmmakers. Many of the Premiere fi lmmakers were returning directors (Errol Morris, Tom DiCillo, Victor Nunez, Gregg Araki, Kevin Smith), whose earlier, sometimes unknown, work had received a warm reception at Sundance. The Piper-Heidsieck tribute to independent vision went to actor/director Tim Robbins, and a major retrospective of the works of German New-Wave giant Rainer Werner Fassbinder was staged, with many of his original actors fl own in for forums. It was a fi tting tribute to both Fassbinder and the Festival and the ways that American independent cinema was indeed becoming international. AWARDS GRAND JURY PRIZE JURY PRIZE IN LATIN AMERICAN CINEMA Documentary—GIRLS LIKE US, directed by Jane C. Wagner and LANDSCAPES OF MEMORY (O SERTÃO DAS MEMÓRIAS), directed by José Araújo Tina DiFeliciantonio SPECIAL JURY AWARD IN LATIN AMERICAN CINEMA Dramatic—SUNDAY, directed by Jonathan Nossiter DEEP CRIMSON, directed by Arturo Ripstein AUDIENCE AWARD JURY PRIZE IN SHORT FILMMAKING Documentary—Paul Monette: THE BRINK OF SUMMER’S END, directed by MAN ABOUT TOWN, directed by Kris Isacsson Monte Bramer Dramatic—HURRICANE, directed by Morgan J. Freeman; and LOVE JONES, HONORABLE MENTIONS IN SHORT FILMMAKING directed by Theodore Witcher (shared) BIRDHOUSE, directed by Richard C. Zimmerman; and SYPHON-GUN, directed by KC Amos FILMMAKERS TROPHY Documentary—LICENSED TO KILL, directed by Arthur Dong Dramatic—IN THE COMPANY OF MEN, directed by Neil LaBute DIRECTING AWARD Documentary—ARTHUR DONG, director of Licensed To Kill Dramatic—MORGAN J.
    [Show full text]
  • Randy Finch Film Department, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32816 Phone 407-823-6111 Email: [email protected]
    Randy Finch Film Department, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL 32816 Phone 407-823-6111 Email: [email protected] EDUCATION 1987 Juris Doctor FORDHAM UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW 1978 Bachelor of Arts HARVARD COLLEGE Psychology and Social Relations Cum Laude PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE TEACHING 2006-present Associate Professor, UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA 2005-2006 Visiting Associate Professor, UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA FILM/TELEVISION PRODUCED FEATURE LENGTH CREDITS 1997-1999 Producer, OUTSIDE PROVIDENCE (Miramax Films) Developed screenplay from Peter Farrelly’s coming-of- age novel. Produced the movie with a cast including Alec Baldwin, Shawn Hatosy and Amy Smart, and negotiated sale to Miramax. 1994-1997 Producer, THE SUBSTANCE OF FIRE (Miramax Films) Developed screenplay from Jon Robin Baitz’s play. Structured the deals including equity financing and, assembled cast including Sarah Jessica Parker, Ron Rifkin, Timothy Hutton and Tony Goldwyn. Produced film and negotiated sale to distributor. 1993-1994 Executive Producer, FEDERAL HILL (Miramax/Trimark Films) Negotiated rights acquisition and sale of independent film. Orchestrated worldwide festival campaign. Winner Critic’s Award and Audience Award at 1994 Deauville Film Festival. 1990-1991 Producer, CAROLINA SKELETONS (NBC) Developed teleplay from David Stout’s Edgar Award winning novel. Stars; Louis Gossett Jr., Bruce Dern & Melissa Leo. 1987-1988 Associate Producer, MILES FROM HOME (Cinecom) Developed screenplay for Gary Sinises’s film directing debut. Cast included Richard Gere, Helen Hunt, Brian Dennehy, and John Malkovich. THEATER SELECTED PRODUCED CREDITS 1995 Director, THE ENGAGEMENT (Workhouse Theater, NY, NY) Directed the premiere of Richard Vetere’s comic play at off-off- Broadway venue. 1994-1995 Co-Producer, NEW YORK STAGE AND FILM Produced plays summer seasons at Vassar College Poughkeepsie, NY, including new work by John Patrick Shanley (author of MOONSTRUCK and DOUBT) and Steve Martin.
    [Show full text]
  • Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: How the Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll Generation Saved Hollywood Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    EASY RIDERS, RAGING BULLS: HOW THE SEX, DRUGS AND ROCK AND ROLL GENERATION SAVED HOLLYWOOD PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Peter Biskind | 512 pages | 26 Apr 1999 | SIMON & SCHUSTER | 9780684857084 | English | New York, United States Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: How the Sex, Drugs and Rock and Roll Generation Saved Hollywood PDF Book My impression of this documentary wasn't so great due to the fact of already seeing and knowing a similar themed work a few years ago called "A Decade Under the Influence" , directed by Ted Demme and Richard LaGravenese, which was a better project for numerous reasons. Why do people go see them? The book is hefty with gossip of all kinds, which is too bad because he's talking about the revolution in films in the 60's to early 80's. It is chock full of interviews and choice information about the time period 60's's in American cinema that changed everything, for a lot better and some for not. Beatty likes to fuck alot. Biskind's book disappointed me tremendously. Return to the Books Home Page. Assassinations, cultural domination, drugging, spying, provocation: Talk about taking the fight to your opponents—the American people—and crippling them for generations! But in the kind of popularized pseudohistory ''Easy Riders, Raging Bulls'' exemplifies, anecdotes are valued above all else, bitchy gossip is privileged, dysfunction is automatically more fascinating than artistic success, aggrieved former friends and former lovers are granted the license to settle scores sometimes anonymously , documentation is disdained and historical analysis must be squeezed into the narrative quickly, so as not to disrupt the dishing.
    [Show full text]
  • Scorses by Ebert
    Scorsese by Ebert other books by An Illini Century roger ebert A Kiss Is Still a Kiss Two Weeks in the Midday Sun: A Cannes Notebook Behind the Phantom’s Mask Roger Ebert’s Little Movie Glossary Roger Ebert’s Movie Home Companion annually 1986–1993 Roger Ebert’s Video Companion annually 1994–1998 Roger Ebert’s Movie Yearbook annually 1999– Questions for the Movie Answer Man Roger Ebert’s Book of Film: An Anthology Ebert’s Bigger Little Movie Glossary I Hated, Hated, Hated This Movie The Great Movies The Great Movies II Awake in the Dark: The Best of Roger Ebert Your Movie Sucks Roger Ebert’s Four-Star Reviews 1967–2007 With Daniel Curley The Perfect London Walk With Gene Siskel The Future of the Movies: Interviews with Martin Scorsese, Steven Spielberg, and George Lucas DVD Commentary Tracks Beyond the Valley of the Dolls Casablanca Citizen Kane Crumb Dark City Floating Weeds Roger Ebert Scorsese by Ebert foreword by Martin Scorsese the university of chicago press Chicago and London Roger Ebert is the Pulitzer The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637 Prize–winning film critic of the Chicago The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London Sun-Times. Starting in 1975, he cohosted © 2008 by The Ebert Company, Ltd. a long-running weekly movie-review Foreword © 2008 by The University of Chicago Press program on television, first with Gene All rights reserved. Published 2008 Siskel and then with Richard Roeper. He Printed in the United States of America is the author of numerous books on film, including The Great Movies, The Great 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 1 2 3 4 5 Movies II, and Awake in the Dark: The Best of Roger Ebert, the last published by the ISBN-13: 978-0-226-18202-5 (cloth) University of Chicago Press.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 2 1970S Hollywood.Pdf
    FILM IN THE 1970s THE FILM SCHOOL GENERATION AND THE BIRTH OF THE NEW HOLLYWOOD ROGER CORMAN - Born in 1926 - Known as “King of the Bs” – his best-known film is The Little Shop of Horrors (1962) - Made many low-budget exploitation films, and used the profits to finance and distribute prestigious films – many of them directed by his protégés, who went on to become some of the most influential directors of the 1970s and beyond - Honorary Academy Award in 2009 “for his rich engendering of films and filmmakers” PETER BOGDANOVICH - Born in 1939 - Film programmer at MoMA, wrote about film for Esquire; worked with Orson Welles, John Ford, and other classic Hollywood directors - 1971 – directed The Last Picture Show – followed up with successes What’s Up, Doc?, Paper Moon - Later films didn’t fulfill his early promise, but he continues to be an influential voice on the subject of film history FRANCIS - Born in 1939 FORD - MFA from UCLA (1966) – first major COPPOLA director to graduate from a prominent university film program - Screenwriter – Patton – won first Oscar - 1969 – established American Zoetrope with his protégé George Lucas - 1972 – The Godfather - 1974 – The Godfather Part 2 and The Conversation MARTIN SCORSESE - Born in 1942 - B.S. (1964) and M.A. (1968) from NYU - Worked with Corman; and, as his student project, edited Woodstock (1970) - Rose to fame in 1973 – Mean Streets – not a commercial hit, but had a dynamic style, and set a template for character types and themes and settings he would return to throughout his career GEORGE LUCAS - Born in 1944 - USC graduate – won 1965 National Student Film Festival with THX-1138 - Apprenticed with Coppola, and later collaborated with him - First major success – American Graffiti (1973) - Invested those profits into Lucasfilm, Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Module Definition Form (MDF)
    Module Definition Form (MDF) Module code: MOD004643 Version: 3 Date Amended: 28/Oct/2015 1. Module Title Scriptwriting 2a. Module Leader 2b. Department 2c. Faculty Judy Forshaw Department of English and Media Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences 3a. Level 3b. Module Type 6 Standard (fine graded) 4a. Credits 4b. Study Hours 30 300 5. Restrictions Type Module Code Module Name Condition Courses to which this module is restricted: None LEARNING, TEACHING AND ASSESSMENT INFORMATION 6a. Module Description You will be introduced to the scope and conventions of script writing across a range of forms – film, television, radio and gaming – through analysis of a diverse range of classic and contemporary examples. The creative process is examined, from the collection of ideas at the notebook stage, to the creation of a treatment, to the production and editing of a finished script. You will be required to engage in this process by maintaining a reading journal and writer’s notebook where you will record your responses to material viewed and listened to, and created; thereby encouraging the integration of viewing/listening and writing. Material studied may include screenplays by Paul Schrader, Charlie Kaufman, Sophia Coppola, Quentin Tarantino, Aaron Sorkin and Paul Thomas Anderson. Television series may include, Breaking Bad, Mad Men, The Killing, House of Cards and The Returned. Audio material may include selected Afternoon Plays and radio comedy series. Writing exercises focus on practical writing techniques such as writing an effective treatment or outline, and exploring the different techniques needed for different broadcast mediums. Seminar workshops are based around the reading and writing exercises prepared each week.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Evolving Authorship, Developing Contexts: 'Life Lessons'
    Notes 1 Evolving Authorship, Developing Contexts: ‘Life Lessons’ 1. This trajectory finds its seminal outlining in Caughie (1981a), being variously replicated in, for example, Lapsley and Westlake (1988: 105–28), Stoddart (1995), Crofts (1998), Gerstner (2003), Staiger (2003) and Wexman (2003). 2. Compare the oft-quoted words of Sarris: ‘The art of the cinema … is not so much what as how …. Auteur criticism is a reaction against sociological criticism that enthroned the what against the how …. The whole point of a meaningful style is that it unifies the what and the how into a personal state- ment’ (1968: 36). 3. For a fuller discussion of the conception of film authorship here described, see Grist (2000: 1–9). 4. While for this book New Hollywood Cinema properly refers only to this phase of filmmaking, the term has been used by some to designate ‘either something diametrically opposed to’ such filmmaking, ‘or some- thing inclusive of but much larger than it’ (Smith, M. 1998: 11). For the most influential alternative position regarding what he calls ‘the New Hollywood’, see Schatz (1993). For further discussion of the debates sur- rounding New Hollywood Cinema, see Kramer (1998), King (2002), Neale (2006) and King (2007). 5. ‘Star image’ is a concept coined by Richard Dyer in relation to film stars, but it can be extended to other filmmaking personnel. To wit: ‘A star image is made out of media texts that can be grouped together as promotion, publicity, films and commentaries/criticism’ (1979: 68). 6. See, for example, Grant (2000), or the conception of ‘post-auteurism’ out- lined and critically demonstrated in Verhoeven (2009).
    [Show full text]
  • Tokyo Story (Tokyo Monogatari, Yasujiro Ozu, 1953) Discussion Points 1
    FAC@JGC John Gray Centre Star Room April 2016 Tokyo Story (Tokyo monogatari, Yasujiro Ozu, 1953) Discussion Points 1. Think about what is at the core (theme) of the story? 2. How does Ozu depict family dynamics in this film – specifically the bond between parents and children? 3. How do you respond to the slow pace of the film? 4. What is your opinion on the portrayal of women in the narrative? 5. What do you think is the effect of presenting: (a) frames in which the camera is right between the two people conversing and films each person directly? (b) so-called tatami shots (the camera is placed as if it were a person kneeling on a tatami mat)? 1 Dr Hanita Ritchie Twitter: @CineFem FAC@JGC John Gray Centre Star Room April 2016 6. How does Ozu present the progression of time in the story? 7. Think about the following translated dialogue between Kyoko, the youngest daughter in the family, and Noriko, the widowed daughter-in-law, after Mrs Hirayama’s death. How would you interpret it in terms of the story as a whole? K: “I think they should have stayed a bit longer.” N: “But they’re busy.” K: “They’re selfish. Demanding things and leaving like this.” N: “They have their own affairs.” K: “You have yours too. They’re selfish. Wanting her clothes right after her death. I felt so sorry for poor mother. Even strangers would have been more considerate.” N: “But look Kyoko. At your age I thought so too. But children do drift away from their parents.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Twenty-Seven Years of Nominees & Winners FILM INDEPENDENT SPIRIT AWARDS
    2012 Twenty-Seven Years of Nominees & Winners FILM INDEPENDENT SPIRIT AWARDS BEST FIRST SCREENPLAY 2012 NOMINEES (Winners in bold) *Will Reiser 50/50 BEST FEATURE (Award given to the producer(s)) Mike Cahill & Brit Marling Another Earth *The Artist Thomas Langmann J.C. Chandor Margin Call 50/50 Evan Goldberg, Ben Karlin, Seth Rogen Patrick DeWitt Terri Beginners Miranda de Pencier, Lars Knudsen, Phil Johnston Cedar Rapids Leslie Urdang, Dean Vanech, Jay Van Hoy Drive Michel Litvak, John Palermo, BEST FEMALE LEAD Marc Platt, Gigi Pritzker, Adam Siegel *Michelle Williams My Week with Marilyn Take Shelter Tyler Davidson, Sophia Lin Lauren Ambrose Think of Me The Descendants Jim Burke, Alexander Payne, Jim Taylor Rachael Harris Natural Selection Adepero Oduye Pariah BEST FIRST FEATURE (Award given to the director and producer) Elizabeth Olsen Martha Marcy May Marlene *Margin Call Director: J.C. Chandor Producers: Robert Ogden Barnum, BEST MALE LEAD Michael Benaroya, Neal Dodson, Joe Jenckes, Corey Moosa, Zachary Quinto *Jean Dujardin The Artist Another Earth Director: Mike Cahill Demián Bichir A Better Life Producers: Mike Cahill, Hunter Gray, Brit Marling, Ryan Gosling Drive Nicholas Shumaker Woody Harrelson Rampart In The Family Director: Patrick Wang Michael Shannon Take Shelter Producers: Robert Tonino, Andrew van den Houten, Patrick Wang BEST SUPPORTING FEMALE Martha Marcy May Marlene Director: Sean Durkin Producers: Antonio Campos, Patrick Cunningham, *Shailene Woodley The Descendants Chris Maybach, Josh Mond Jessica Chastain Take Shelter
    [Show full text]
  • Transcript a Pinewood Dialogue with Paul Schrader
    TRANSCRIPT A PINEWOOD DIALOGUE WITH PAUL SCHRADER Paul Schrader made his mark as a film critic with a definitive essay about film noir . As a filmmaker, he received widespread attention for his screenplays for Martin Scorsese's Taxi Driver and Raging Bull . Since his directorial debut with the incisive working-class drama Blue Collar , Schrader has made some of the most austere and rigorous movies to emerge from contemporary Hollywood. His biggest critical success to date, which he discusses here, is the independent film Affliction , a lean and unrelenting version of Russell Banks's novel, a father-son drama featuring a riveting central performance by Nick Nolte. A Pinewood Dialogue with Paul Schrader, take away from the film. So could you talk about moderated by Chief Curator David Schwartz that? (January 10, 1999): SCHRADER: Yeah. Russell Banks said to me fairly SCHWARTZ: Please welcome Paul Schrader. early on in the rehearsals, he said, “You know that (Applause) the main character, of course, is the narrator.” And I had sort of assumed he meant the main SCHRADER: Thank you. I was wondering, you character is me, you know, because I’m the know, just exactly how many people would come author. But as I got deeper and deeper into it, I out to see a sort of severe movie while the Jets started to realize, in fact, what he meant by that, were playing. (Laughter) They’re doing very well. which is that this is a story that is being told to They’re sort of manhandling the Jaguars at the you.
    [Show full text]
  • Christianity and the Climate Crisis in Auteur Cinema
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 3-10-2021 "Will God Forgive Us?": Christianity and the Climate Crisis in Auteur Cinema Margaret Alice Parson Louisiana State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the Rhetoric Commons Recommended Citation Parson, Margaret Alice, ""Will God Forgive Us?": Christianity and the Climate Crisis in Auteur Cinema" (2021). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 5477. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/5477 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. “WILL GOD FORGIVE US?”: CHRISTIANITY AND THE CLIMATE CRISIS IN AUTEUR CINEMA A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Department of Communication Studies by Margaret Alice Parson B.A., Otterbein University, 2015 M.A., Ball State University, 2017 May 2021 For Tegan ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation, as with all dissertations, is a communal act. Without the massive support of my community, it never would have come into being. Most significantly, Dr. Bryan McCann. This project was completed because of your empathy and guidance. I can never thank you enough. The other members of my committee, Drs. Mack, Saas, and Shaffer have all offered their expertise and kindness in this project’s growth, and I of course am indebted to them for their comments and encouragement.
    [Show full text]