Home

First Paper

Midterm Review

Second Paper

Final Review


BACK TO TOP

Last Updated:
04/21/06


Comparative Literature 302
Film Theory: Critical Concepts
Winter 2005

Exams and Papers
Guidelines for Paper #1


Basic Requirements: This assignment asks you to analyze and compare the opening sequence of two films screened for this course. The paper should consist of two parts. The first is a shot-by-shot breakdown (usually 2-3 pages∗) of the opening credit sequence for one of the following films: The 400 Blows (François Truffaut, 1959); Jules and Jim (Truffaut, 1962); Cléo from 5 to 7 (Agnès Varda, 1962); Pierrot le fou (Godard, 1965) and Closely Watched Trains (Jiří Menzel, 1966). You can also create a shot breakdown for the opening sequence of the film proper for any of the above films, or for Cruel Story of Youth (Oshima Nagisa, 1960), Breathless (Jean-Luc Godard, 1960), or Blow-Up (Michelangelo Antonioni, 1966). The format of this shot breakdown should be a numbered list, with each number corresponding to one shot. Next to the number, you should identify the type of shot (CU, LS, etc.) and describe any important technical details (type of shot, mobile framing, lighting, transitions, etc.) or other relevant information related to dialogue, sound, and figure movement. This section will be concerned primarily with the formal elements of the sequence. For review of the relevant terms, see the following web page: http://classes.yale.edu/film-analysis/. This “analysis” link on this page also has two examples that demonstrate the appropriate level of detail and review the relevant abbreviations. (Your own shot breakdown will include only the kinds of information contained in the “shot description” column. The “analysis” column on this webpage will be more similar to the essay portion of your assignment.) This website also provides a thorough review of important film terms and a reminder of the important issues to consider when writing about film: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~writing/materials/student/humanities/film.shtml

Second, you should write an essay of approximately five pages comparing that credit sequence to the opening credits or opening sequence of another film screened this quarter. While writing this essay you should think about the links between this beginning and the film as a whole and about the relationship between the two films you choose to compare. A successful credit or opening sequence should introduce important thematic and stylistic dimensions of the film; it should be a preview of coming attractions and a brief glimpse of the film as a whole. A successful analysis of the opening of a film is also implicitly an analysis of the entire film, and it should identify important thematic and stylistic elements and analyze the way these initial shots foreshadow their development over the course of the film. In other words, the essay should treat the sequence as a segment of the film with its own internal structure (a beginning, an ending, patterns of editing and mise-en-scène), but it should also consider how that particular sequence is related to the overall formal, textual, and cultural system of the film. The comparative dimension of this assignment gives you the opportunity to think about the similarities and differences between the films of one director at various moments in his or her career, the continuity and diversity of films produced in one national cinema during the 1960s, or the relationship between films from cinematic “new waves” in two countries.

∗ The length of the shot breakdown obviously depends on the length and complexity of the sequence.

Style and Format: The paper should begin with an informative and provocative title. It should state the thesis or argument early on, and each paragraph should contribute to that argument in clearly identifiable ways. Avoid pure description and plot summary whenever possible, and, when necessary, use only evocative, “thick” description. Be specific, and support all general statements with particular examples. Cite any outside sources, using a proper format, and include a “works cited” page. Remember that film titles should appear underlined or in italics, in both the essay and the works cited page. Essay titles should appear in quotations. For information about citation formats and conventions, see the following website: http://www.dartmouth.edu/~sources/.


What to Look for in a Sequence Analysis
The following excerpt from “Reading a Film Sequence,” by Anton Kaes and Eric Rentschler, provides an exhaustive list of things to look for when doing a sequence analysis. Your own essay will focus only on the elements that are most important and remarkable in your particular sequence. You don’t need to mention every item on this list, and you’ll most likely mention only a few.


Preliminary Notes

The inventory of the following worksheet for the most draws attention to formal concerns, to matters grounded in the work of the text. Every text, though, is a function of at least two contexts: the context in which it was made, the context in which it functions.

Every text speaks in a number of different ways, i. e., it recycles the givens of tradition, engaging various forms of discourse, putting them together in a way to produce an aesthetic entity. These texts are something like a stringing together of quotations, of reworking conventions, of adding together a number of impulses from the world in which one lives, appropriating various elements in a way that leads to something different, and in that sense, new.

The work that goes into ferreting out the different voices in a text involves, among other things, an awareness of historical situations, the assumptions and background of an artist and his/her team, the motivation (s) behind a certain production. Beyond that, to talk about a filmic text means that we engage in a dialogue that brings us into the scene as a participant in an exchange: we make certain assumptions, both methodological and theoretical ones. Even the statement “I didn’t like this film” carries with it a sizable amount of implicit assumptions.

Any thorough analysis of a film involves studying the following:

    •     the socio-historical background to the film, economic and political factors that conditioned its making and explain its existence;
    •     the traditions out of which a given film arises:
         the sorts of cultural quotations it partakes of, the conventions it makes use of, the degree to which it participates in certain specifically national patterns of expression;
    •     the institutional positioning of a given film:
         its status in the public sphere in which it is received;
    •     the director/author’s larger body of work, of which the film is part of a larger whole;
    •     the “work” of the text itself, never forgetting, though, that films issue from a larger extra-filmic whole;
    •     the question of a film’s reception in time and how this has pre-shaped our own expectations as well as the film’s place in history;
    •     the relation of a text to certain intertexts; these can be directly suggested by a film or they can be creative associations suggested by the spectator.

 I. Narrative

 1. What is the function of this sequence within the larger narrative action:
exposition, climax, foreshadowing, transition, etc? Does the sequence encapsulate the major oppositions at work in the film? What are the underlying issues in the sequence (often glossed over and obscured in the overt action and in the dialogue, but possibly alluded to in the visuals)? What is the selected sequence “really” about? What aspect of the story does it establish, revise, develop? How do the visuals express it?

2. How is the story told? (linear, with flashbacks, flash-forwards, episodically?) What “happens” on the level of the plot? How do plot and story differ, if at all?

3. Can the sequence be divided into individual segments (indicated, for instance, by shifts of location, jumps in time, intertitles, etc.)? Assuming the film’s story consists of many “wisps of narratives,” all intricately interwoven with each other, how many simultaneous narratives (substories) does the sequence contain?

4. How do the various channels of information used in film--image, speech, sound, music, writing--interact to produce meaning? Does one of the channels dominate in this sequence?

5. Is there a recognizable source of the narration? Voice-over or off-screen commentary? What is the narrator’s perspective?

6. Does the film acknowledge the spectator or do events transpire as if no one were present? Do characters look into the camera or pretend it is not there? Does the film reflect on the fact that the audience assumes the role of voyeurs to the screen exhibition?

7. Does the film reflect on its “constructedness” by breaking the illusion of a self-sufficient “story apparently told by nobody?” Are there intertitles, film-within-film sequences, obtrusive and self-conscious (“unrealistic”) camera movements calling attention to the fact that the film is a construct?

8. How does the narrative position the spectator vis-a-vis the onscreen events and characters? Are we made to respond in certain ways to certain events (say, through music that “tells” us how to respond or distances us from the action)? How are women portrayed? Are they primarily shown as passive objects of the male gaze? Does the camera transfigure them (through soft-focus, framing, etc.)?

9. Does the narrative (as encapsulated in the sequence) express (indirectly) current political views? Does the film sequence conform to, affirm, or question dominant ideologies? Does the filmmaker (unconsciously) subvert the expression of minority or non-conformist views by recourse to old visual cliches?

II. Staging

The filmmaker stages an event to be filmed. What is put in front of the camera? How does the staging comment on the story? How does it visualize the main conflicts of the story?

1. Setting:
On location or in the studio? “Realistic” or stylized? Historical or contemporary? Props that take on a symbolic function? Are things like mirrors, crosses, windows, books accentuated? Why? How do sets and props comment on the narrative?

2. Space:
Cluttered or empty? Does it express a certain atmosphere? Is the design symmetrical or asymmetrical? Balanced or unbalanced? Stylized or natural? Open form: frame is de-emphasized, has a documentary “snapshot” quality; closed form: frame is carefully composed, self-contained, and theatrical; the frame acts as a boundary and a limit. Is space used as an indirect comment on a character’s inner state of mind?

3. Lighting:
What is illuminated, what is in the shadow? Lighting quality: hard lighting (bold shadows) or soft (diffused illumination)? Direction: frontal lighting (flat image), sidelighting (for dramatic effect), backlighting (only the silhouette is visible), underlighting (from a fireplace, for example)? “Realistic” or high contrast/symbolic lighting? High key/low key? Special lighting effects? (e. g. shadows, spotlight). Natural lighting or studio? (Hollywood has three light sources: key light, fill light, and backlight.) How does the lighting enhance the expressive potential of the film?

4. Acting and Choreography:
What do appearance, gestures, facial expressions, voice signify? Professional actors or non-actors? Why? Movement of characters: toward or away from the camera, from left to right or vice versa? Do characters interact with each other through their gaze? Who looks at whom? Grouping of characters before the camera; view ofcharacters (clear or obscured [behind objects], isolated or integrated, center or off-center, background or foreground?) How do acting and choreography attract and guide the viewer’s attention (and manipulate his/her sympathies)? How do they create suspense, ambiguity, wrong clues, complexity, and certainties?

5. Costume and Make-Up:
“Realistic” or stylized/abstract? Social and cultural coding: what do the costumes signify (status, wealth, attitude, foreignness, etc.)?

III. Cinematography

The filmmaker controls not only what is filmed but how it is filmed: how the staged, “pro-filmic” event is photographed and framed, how long the image lasts on the screen.

1. Photography:


Film Stock:
What type of photographic film is used? (Fast film stock to achieve grainy, contrasty look) Tinting? Over/underexposed? Black and white or color? Symbolic use of colors? Subjective use/colors linked to certain characters? Colors as leitmotif?

Speed of Motion:
“Normal” speed (24 frames per second for sound film; 16 for silent); slow motion; accelerated motion; freeze frame; time-lapse (low shooting speed: a frame a minute; see the sun set in seconds)?

Lens:
Wide-angle; normal; telephoto lens (depth reduced)? Zoom lens?

Focus:
Depth of field; shallow focus; deep focus (everything is in sharp focus)? Rack focus (lens refocuses)? Soft focus?

Special Effects:
Glass shot; superimposition; projection process?

How do such photographic manipulations of the shot function within the overall content of the film?

2. Camera/Framing:

Angle/Level:
High angle, low angle, straight-on angle; eye-level shot; oblique angle; canted frame?

Distance:
Extreme long shot, long shot, medium shot, (extreme) close-up?

Movement (Mobile Framing):
Pan: horizontal “pan-orama” shot? Tilt: up or down? Tracking (ordolly) shot: camera travels forward, backward, in various directions? Crane? Aerial shot? How do camera movements function? What information do they provide about the space of the image? Does the camera always follow the action? Does it continually offer new perspectives on the characters and the objects? Subjective camera movement? How does it relate to on-screen/offscreen space?

Type of shot:
Establishing shot? Point-of-view shot? Reaction shot? Shot-counter shot?

IV. Editing

Transition Techniques:
Gradual changes: dissolve (superimpose briefly one shot over the following; fade-in or -out (lighten or darken the image); cuts (instantaneous changes from one shot to another); abrupt shifts and disjunctions. Does editing comment on the relationships between characters and spaces?

Purpose of Editing:
Continuity editing, thematic or dialectical montage, “invisible” cutting, shock cutting, cross-cutting (alternates shots of two or more lines of actions going on indifferent places).

Rhythm and Pace:
flowing/jerky/disjointed/more pans than cuts? /fast-paced/slow-paced/ are there major changes in rhythm due to different editing? Shot duration?

V. Sound

Music:
Is its source part of the story (=“diegetic”) or added on (=“nondiegetic”)? With diegetic sound the source of the sound can be visible (on-screen) or unseen (off-screen). What kind of music: classical/rock/exotic/familiar? Typical for the period depicted? Does music comment (foreshadow or contradict) the action? Does it irritate? What is the music’s purpose in a film? How does it direct our attention within the image? How does it shape our interpretation of the image?

Sound effects:
Artificial or natural sound? On- or off-screen source? Is there subjective sound? What does it signify?

Dialogue/silence:
Stilted or artificial language? Do different characters use different kinds of language? Slang, dialect, profanity? Allusion to other texts, quotations? Do certain characters speak through their silences?

Voice-Over/Narration:
Who is speaking and from where? Is voice-over part of the actionor (nondiegetically) outside of it? What does the narrator know and what is his/her relationship to the action? Is s/he reliable, omniscient, unreliable?

Synchronization:
Is sound matched with the image? Non-simultaneous sound? (For instance, reminiscing narrator or when sound from the next scene begins while the images of the last one are still on the screen. This is also called a “sound bridge”.)




Midterm Review


Part I: Identification (30-40%)
In the identification section your response should answer the “who,” “what,” “where,” “why,” and “when” questions as precisely as possible. Needless to say, it’s not difficult to identify where the Czech New Wave took place; and given that the class is limited to roughly a 30-year period (with a few years from the 1950s and 1990s included on either end), the “when” questions should not be too complicated, at least when discussed in the most general terms. But a complete answer should go into much greater detail. Which films and filmmakers help launch and define each of these movements? Which critics and manifestoes are influential at the beginning or during the development of the movement? How do you mark the beginning and the end of each era? Even the obvious “where” question can be answered more precisely: which cities, which studios, which exhibition locations, etc., are involved in each of these phenomena? A perfect answer should supplement information provided in the lectures with additional material learned from the course reading.

Possible Identification Terms
French New Wave
    Cahiers du cinéma
    Auteur theory and the politique des auteurs
    The Left Bank Group
Taiyozoku films   
Japanese New Wave
Czech New Wave
International Art Cinema
Imperfect Cinema & Third Cinema
New German Cinema


Part II: Analysis (60-70%)
This section will consist of two or three clips from films listed on the syllabus (i.e., from films that were screened in their entirety, not from films that were only introduced through excerpts in class). First, you’ll be asked to identify the title, director, and year of the film. Second, you will be asked to analyze the important formal and stylistic aspects of the sequence (what you see and hear in the clip). Which elements of the cinematography, mise-en-scene, and editing are particularly remarkable? Third, you’ll be asked to discuss the relationship between this sequence and the film as a whole. Which formal or thematic features are introduced, developed, or resolved at this moment in the film? Fourth, which aspects of this sequence help us understand the relationship between this film and others introduced in the class and the reading? Is the style or narrative consistent with broader trends in filmmaking during the period covered in the course?

Guidelines for Paper #2



Procedure:
The overall purpose of this assignment is to give you an opportunity to view and analyze a film or group of films related to the second half of this course (roughly the late 1960s and 1970s). The paper should be 5 pages, typed and double-spaced. The due date is Friday, June 1, but there will be no late penalty if you turn in the paper before 4:30 on Monday, June 5. As with the last paper, you should deliver a hard copy to the box marked with the class name on the table outside the main Comparative Literature office (B-531 Padelford). Once again, the paper should have an evocative and informative title, a thesis (not a general topic, but a specific position that must be argued and supported), and the necessary evidence to back up that thesis. Film studies is a field with a number of different methodologies and approaches to its subject matter, so that evidence can take many forms, ranging from information about various moments in film history, to biographical information about the people involved in the making of the film you’re analyzing, from critical responses to the film to the theoretical concepts introduced in the reading. But most of all the evidence will be drawn from the film itself or films themselves. Although this assignment does not call for a sequence analysis or shot-by-shot breakdown, you may want to identify a crucial segment from a particular film and discuss it in depth. This will ensure that your analysis remains rooted in the specifics of what you see and hear on screen.

Paper Topics:
1) The representation of violence—especially the graphic or aestheticized representation of violence—has been a subject of significant controversy in American film throughout the century of cinema, but especially since the 1960s. Each of the films screened in the section on the new Hollywood cinema contains at least one significant act of violence, and several conclude in a hail of gunfire. Using at least one of the films screened for this course after the sixth week (i.e., Blow-Up and after), examine both the manner in which violence is represented and the function this violence serves within the film itself. This essay can focus on one particular film or sequence, or it can be comparative and cumulative and therefore make claims about a group of films or a historical period more generally. Whatever its precise subject matter, the paper should consider both the formal aspects of the film—how it represents violence, which details the camera and soundtrack foreground, whether the film departs from or attempts to imitate a documentary-like recording of events, etc.—and the significance of these particular scenes in the film as a whole and the cultural context in which the film was produced and received.

Variation: At least two landmark films from the 1970s contain scenes that are explicitly concerned with the effects of violent or otherwise provocative images on the mind of a viewer subjected to quasi-scientific tests or experiments. In The Parallax View (Alan J. Pakula, 1974), a corporation hiring assassins uses a graphic slide show as part of a psychological evaluation of its potential “employees.” In A Clockwork Orange (Stanley Kubrick, 1971) violent images become a means of psychological retraining and aversion therapy, among other things. In this variation on the first assignment, you can compare and contrast the representation and function of these two sequences in The Parallax View and A Clockwork Orange, with the same level of attention to the way these images are constructed and their significance within the film as a whole. You can also compare and contrast one or both of these sequences with one of the other films screened for the class.

2) Each of the films screened in this half of the course takes great pains to explore the environment where the story takes place. In most cases the locations—the landscapes of Easy Rider, Badlands, Yellow Earth, and Red Sorghum or the small towns of Bonnie and Clyde or the cityscapes of Blow-Up, Taxi Driver, and Raging Bull—are not merely the backdrop for the narrative; they become significant objects of attention and inquiry for the filmmaker. Using at least one of the films screened for this course after the sixth week (i.e., Blow-Up and after), examine both the manner in which the landscape is represented and the function this environment serves within the films themselves. This essay can focus on one particular film or sequence, or it can be comparative and cumulative and therefore make claims about a group of films or a historical period more generally. Whatever its precise subject matter, the paper should consider both the formal aspects of the film—how it represents these spaces, which details the camera and soundtrack foreground, etc.—and the significance of these particular spaces in the film as a whole and the cultural context in which the film was produced and received.

3) Like the sequence analysis paper, this topic asks you to write an essay that follows leads contained in the credits for one of the films screen this quarter. But in this case you are asked not to analyze the sequence itself but instead to examine the contribution of one of the figures listed in the credits to the new Hollywood cinema. This individual must be someone other than a director or lead actor (i.e., you should not write about Dennis Hopper, Martin Scorsese, Robert DeNiro, Warren Beatty the actor, etc., but you can focus on a supporting actor or actress, a cinematographer, a screenwriter, Warren Beatty the producer, etc.). One way of approaching this assignment is to follow the leads contained in the imdb entry on each film by clicking on individuals listed in the credits and consulting their filmography. You’ll see, for example, that Paul Schrader worked as a screenwriter for several Scorsese films but also began directing his own movies in the late 1970s. What is the new Hollywood cinema seen through the lens of Schrader’s screenplays or his own camera? You’ll see that Harvey Keitel appears in two of most crucial early Scorsese films (as Sport in Taxi Driver and as the lead in Mean Streets). How does the acting of Keitel help embody a new kind of masculinity in this period? You’ll see that Dede Allen is listed as the editor for some of the most important films of the late 1960s and early 1970s (Bonnie and Clyde, Alice’s Restaurant, Little Big Man, Serpico, and Dog Day Afternoon, among many others). Which aspects of the new Hollywood cinema are constructed in her editing suite? To write this paper, you’ll want to see additional films by this individual from the relevant period. You should also consult at least two outside sources to gather crucial biographical and other data to supplement your viewing of the films.

Resources for Writing about Film
Barsam, Richard. Looking at Movies: An Introduction to Film. New York: Norton, 2004.

Bordwell, David and Thompson, Kristin. Film Art: An Introduction. Seventh edition, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003.

Corrigan, Timothy. A Short Guide to Writing about Film. Fourth Edition. New York: Longman, 2000.

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~writing/materials/student/humanities/film.shtml


http://classes.yale.edu/film-analysis
Final Review


Part I: Identification (30-40%)
As on the midterm, the identification section on the final requires that you answer the “who,” “what,” “where,” “why,” and “when” questions as precisely as possible. You will be responsible for some terms and concepts from the first six weeks of the course, but most come from the material covered after the midterm. Because we spent more time on American cinema from the 1960s onward, your answers to questions on American film should strive for a greater level of detail. In particular, you should discuss the changing structure of the American film industry, as outlined in the lectures and the King and other readings. Identifications of Martin Scorsese and Zhang Yimou should present information gathered from their films and from the Kolker and Lu readings. A perfect answer should supplement information provided in the lectures with additional material learned from the course reading.

Possible Identification Terms
Auteur theory and the politique des auteurs
International Art Cinema
The New Hollywood
    The Hollywood Renaissance
    The “cinema of sensation” (Paul Monaco)
    The blockbuster
    High concept movies
Martin Scorsese
China’s “Fifth Generation”
Zhang Yimou

Part II: Analysis (60-70%)
Again like the midterm, this section of the final will consist of two or three clips from films listed on the syllabus (i.e., from films that were screened in their entirety, not from films that were only introduced through excerpts in class). First, you’ll be asked to identify the title, director, and year of the film. Second, you will be asked to analyze the important formal and stylistic aspects of the sequence (what you see and hear in the clip). Which elements of the cinematography, mise-en-scene, and editing are particularly remarkable? Third, you’ll be asked to discuss the relationship between this sequence and the film as a whole. Which formal or thematic features are introduced, developed, or resolved at this moment in the film? Fourth, which aspects of this sequence help us understand the relationship between this film and others introduced in the class and the reading? Is the style or narrative consistent with broader trends in filmmaking during the period covered in the course?

jtweedie@u.washington.edu