Film Theory and Criticism – Spring 2013

General Course Information

CRN: 18596; Film 4750:025: Film Theory and Criticism – CTW; Spring 2013

Class: MW 3:00-4:15pm (Aderhold Learning Center 229)
Screenings: M 12:30-2:20pm (Arts & Humanities 406)

Course Description

This course provides an introductory overview to film theories and methods of film analysis. Film theory describes how cinema functions as a medium, art form and practice, institution (etc.), and how cinema signifies (e.g. communicates, produces meanings, and constructs itself as a language). Film criticism describes an applied form of film analysis. These two concerns intertwine within the structure of the class much like they remain closely related within practice (e.g. a lot of film theory stems from close analysis and film criticism can advance theoretical claims about the nature of cinema).

This course will deal with two overarching questions. 1) Our textbook asks: “What is the relationship between the cinema, perception and the human body?” and 2) Our question for the class will be: “What is a filmic image?” We will explore these questions (and the relationships between them) through collective and individual analyses of films. We will continue to ask these questions from different angles each week while we shift between different types of film theory and criticism.

Course Objectives

The class has two main objectives: to develop the ability to comprehend and critically engage with scholarly literature about film and to develop the ability to conduct close textual analysis with theoretically informed language. In other words: I will expect you to understand what film theory is and what it is for rather than an end in and of itself, and then, rather than simply “apply it” to films, use it as a tool to develop and express your own personal and sophisticated language of analysis.

By the end of the course, students should be able to:

• Demonstrate knowledge of key terms and concepts related to film theory.
• Understand the major trajectories of film theory’s development and their main concerns and contexts.
• Analyze filmic objects and experiences in precise cinematic terms (e.g. to discuss mise-en-scène, editing, cinematography, and sound, as well as genre and narrative).
• Choose a theoretical lens of analysis that is appropriate to a filmic object and demonstrate why that is the case.
• Provide critical analyses (not merely “thumbs-up” or “thumbs-down” evaluations) of filmic objects and experiences. Film criticism requires an ability to identify meaningful elements in a text and produce cogent arguments about them.
• Develop and polish an argument about a film, which should pursue a specific research question, engage smartly with theoretical readings and concepts, rely on precise and relevant evidence from the film, and proceed in an orderly fashion.

CTW Designation

This course is a designated Critical Thinking through Writing (CTW) course. It is required of all students majoring in Film. Students matriculating to Georgia State on or after Fall 2009 must satisfy the CTW requirements as set out in the Undergraduate Catalog. In film, “critical thinking” is defined as identifying, analyzing, and evaluating arguments and truth claims; and formulating and presenting convincing reasons in support of conclusions. “Writing” refers to the skill of writing clear, well-organized, and grammatically correct English prose. The emphasis throughout the research and writing process will be on ensuring that the student’s project achieves his/her rhetorical ends. All students must clearly articulate their rhetorical strategies in writing and will revise their strategies based on feedback.

Course Prerequisites

Film 1010 (Film Aesthetics & Analysis) and Film 2700 (History of Motion Pictures).

NOTE: It is recommended, even though not required, for students to take one upper-level film class before taking Film Theory. This is because most upper-level classes give the opportunity to encounter theoretical writing with a clear focus. Film 4750, instead, covers a vast array of theories, moving very quickly and without a focus beyond the exposure to theory itself. This is to say: the greater the pre-existing comfort with theory, the easier the class will be.

Texts:

• Thomas Elsaesser & Malte Hagener. Film Theory: An Introduction Through the Senses (New York: Routledge, 2010. (Available at: GSU bookstores, Amazon.com)
• Additional readings available online. It is likely that we will use Dropbox to download readings and submit assignments online, which will require you to sign up for a free Dropbox account. I will send everyone invitations to a Dropbox folder after the first class.
• Course films (will also be available on reserve at the library).

Printable Syllabus, original version without web updates.

Course Policies

Attendance & Participation:

• Your attendance and participation are required in this course.
• Be in class. Missing more than three classes/screenings will dramatically impact your final grade. You do not need to offer an explanation for your absences because I do not differentiate between excused and unexcused absences outside of extreme circumstances. When you miss class, you are responsible for acquiring information about what was discussed–such as notes from a classmate.
• Be on time. Latecomers distract me and other students; if you are more than 15 minutes late, consider yourself absent.
• Be prepared. This is a seminar course, which means that discussion and participation are necessary for your success. To this end, I might employ devious methods to enable communal learning and discussion, but let the unprepared be warned: if I notice that the required readings are not being completed, I will give pop-quizzes.

Assignments:

• Read. All readings should be completed by the date listed on the syllabus. Readings listed as “Background” offer additional insights or background information on the subject matter and are also valuable sources to consider for final papers.
• Watch. All films should be viewed during the scheduled screening time. These screenings are not optional, even if you have already seen one of the films. For films longer than 100-minutes, I will show the end of the film before we begin class. NOTE: Formal attendance will be taken during screenings. To earn full credit for attending you must sign-in at the beginning and the end of the screening.
• Submit. Assignments must be submitted online before class begins on the day that they are due. Either Dropbox or Desire2Learn will be selected as the location for submissions during the first week of class. In-class assignments/quizzes cannot be completed late; no exceptions. Make-up exams are only offered with a legitimate/documented excuse (submitted at least one week in advance) or in the case of a dire, health-related emergency (including medical documentation). All late assignments will be lowered 5% after at the start of class when the assignment is due and will be lowered an additional 5% every 12-hours (10% or 1 letter grade per day).
• On Excuses: I do not typically believe that you are “unable to submit electronically” right before class if other classmates were able to successfully submit their assignments already. To alleviate this risk in the final minutes before any deadline assume: your computer will crash, get a virus, or explode; your USB key drive will be erased or eaten by the dog; your e-mail attachments will become inaccessible because Google will no longer provide G-Mail; you forget to upload your paper to Dropbox; you cannot figure out how to dial a phone to reach the university Help Desk for assistance with Desire2Learn; you cannot provide a backup copy because every possible printer inkwell runs dry; your car will break down, the bus will break down, MARTA derails, or that your eco-friendly car-pool group decides to drive their own cars; any number of people meet their tragic, untimely death(s); and, finally, assume that you may be hung-over or sleep in or may otherwise miss class. No matter which excuse you offer—real or imaginative—you must still meet the assignment deadline. So, be prepared to finish your assignment early, upload it early, double-check that it was uploaded correctly, or something of these sorts. This way you need not waste the creativity that you could put into an assignment on an excuse for a paper that was unable to meet its deadline—for whatever reason.
• And, yo!, be sure to follow these format guidelines for all assignments:
  • File format: PDF
  • File name: “Last Name First Name – Assignment Name” (e.g.”Cannon Kris – Close Analysis”)
  • Document structure/format: cover page for the first page (including pertinent information like the assignment title, your name, the course name and my name), double-spaced, and 12-pt. font. Here is an example.

Other Information:

• This course will contain materials that some students may find offensive (e.g. films with foul language, nudity, sexual scenes, etc.). Review the syllabus carefully to determine your commitment to the course and the films/readings that will be required.
• Turn off ALL personal communication devices before class begins. And, yes, this includes WiFi and other media connections without permission.
• The University offers a range of support services for students. Some of the available resources include:
  • The Writing Studio provides advice and tutoring in composition.
  • Student Support Services offers a variety of assistance, including tutoring, career counseling and support groups.
• Should you have any deeper concern about this class or your academic life more generally, please be aware that the Department of Communication offers entirely confidential advisement, in the Undergraduate Advising Offices on the 6th floor of One Park Place. Academic advisors, staff, and undergraduate students like you, are available to discuss your concerns and suggest strategies to solve them. These people are available for confidential advisement. It’s their job and they do it with passion, so feel free to take advantage of the services they offer.
  • At any time in the semester a student can seek an appointment for an advisement session with the Undergraduate Studies Office by sending an e-mail to advise-comm@gsu.edu or by going to the 8th floor at 25 Park Place.
  • Undergraduate Advisor for the Dept. of Communication: Doug Barthlow, (dbarthlow@gsu.edu)
  • Undergraduate Advisement Coordinator for the Dept. of Communication: Carmela Pattillo, (cpattillo@gsu.edu)
• Students who wish to request accommodation for a disability may do so by registering with the Office of Disability Services. Students may only be accommodated upon issuance of a signed Accommodation Plan by the Office of Disability Services and are responsible for providing a copy of that plan to instructors of all classes in which accommodations are sought.
• Regarding withdrawals: March 5 is the last day to withdraw and possibly receive a W.
  • A revised withdrawal policy for all undergraduates was instituted in Fall 2006. All undergraduates are allowed to withdraw with a grade of “W” a maximum of six times in their entire careers at Georgia State. Students who exceed the limit will automatically receive a grade of “WF” which will count as an “F” for GPA calculations. Withdrawals taken before Fall 2006 will not count against the limit and neither will hardship withdrawals, withdrawals at other institutions or withdrawals after the midpoint. Withdrawals after the semester midpoint are automatically given a grade of “WF.” To avoid withdrawals, a student is encouraged to attend class regularly and complete every assignment on time. Students should contact me via e-mail or during office hours to discuss any problems with the course. A student who does not perform well in class and/or on assignments and exams will be sent an e-mail to schedule a meeting and discuss any problem(s) the student is having with the course. The purpose of the meeting will be to remedy the problem(s) and allow the student to find ways to succeed in this course.
• Finally, your constructive assessment of this course plays an indispensable role in shaping education at Georgia State University. Upon completing the course, please take the time to fill out the online course evaluation.

University Policy on Academic Honesty

While the internet makes plagiarism seem easy—to search on Google for example—it is just as easy for me to track down plagiarism—if you Google it, I can Google it. So, DON’T PLAGIARIZE! Cite all of your sources, put all direct quotations in quotation marks, clearly note when you are paraphrasing work by other authors, don’t try to resubmit work that you have written in another course, etc.

Plagiarism, academic misconduct, or cheating of any kind will not be tolerated. Taking part in any one of these forms of academic dishonesty can result in a zero for the assignment, course failure, and/or expulsion from the university. The university’s policy on academic honesty is published in “On Campus: The Undergraduate Co-Curricular Affairs Handbook” and the “GSU Faculty Handbook,” available online.

REPRINTED FROM THE FACULTY HANDBOOK | July 2010

Introduction

As members of the academic community, students are expected to recognize and uphold standards of intellectual and academic integrity. The university assumes as a basic and minimum standard of conduct in academic matters that students be honest and that they submit for credit only the products of their own efforts. Both the ideals of scholarship and the need for fairness require that all dishonest work be rejected as a basis for academic credit. They also require that students refrain from any and all forms of dishonorable or unethical conduct related to their academic work.

The university’s policy on academic honesty is published in the Faculty Affairs Handbook and the On Campus: The Undergraduate Co-Curricular Affairs Handbook and is available to all members of the university community. The policy represents a core value of the university and all members of the university community are responsible for abiding by its tenets. Lack of knowledge of this policy is not an acceptable defense to any charge of academic dishonesty. All members of the academic community — students, faculty, and staff — are expected to report violations of these standards of academic conduct to the appropriate authorities. The procedures for such reporting are on file in the offices of the deans of each college, the office of the dean of students, and the office of the provost.

In an effort to foster an environment of academic integrity and to prevent academic dishonesty, students are expected to discuss with faculty the expectations regarding course assignments and standards of conduct. Students are encouraged to discuss freely with faculty, academic advisors, and other members of the university community any questions pertaining to the provisions of this policy. In addition, students are encouraged to avail themselves of programs in establishing personal standards and ethics offered through the university’s Counseling Center.

Definitions and Examples

The examples and definitions given below are intended to clarify the standards by which academic honesty and academically honorable conduct are to be judged. The list is merely illustrative of the kinds of infractions that may occur, and it is not intended to be exhaustive. Moreover, the definitions and examples suggest conditions under which unacceptable behavior of the indicated types normally occurs; however, there may be unusual cases that fall outside these conditions which also will be judged unacceptable by the academic community.

• Plagiarism: Plagiarism is presenting another person’s work as one’s own. Plagiarism includes any paraphrasing or summarizing of the works of another person without acknowledgment, including the submitting of another student’s work as one’s own. Plagiarism frequently involves a failure to acknowledge in the text, notes, or footnotes the quotation of the paragraphs, sentences, or even a few phrases written or spoken by someone else. The submission of research or completed papers or projects by someone else is plagiarism, as is the unacknowledged use of research sources gathered by someone else when that use is specifically forbidden by the faculty member. Failure to indicate the extent and nature of one’s reliance on other sources is also a form of plagiarism. Any work, in whole or in part, taken from the Internet or other computer-based resource without properly referencing the source (for example, the URL) is considered plagiarism. A complete reference is required in order that all parties may locate and view the original source. Finally, there may be forms of plagiarism that are unique to an individual discipline or course, examples of which should be provided in advance by the faculty member. The student is responsible for understanding the legitimate use of sources, the appropriate ways of acknowledging academic, scholarly or creative indebtedness, and the consequences of violating this responsibility.
• Cheating on Examinations: Cheating on examinations involves giving or receiving unauthorized help before, during, or after an examination. Examples of unauthorized help include the use of notes, computer based resources, texts, or “crib sheets” during an examination (unless specifically approved by the faculty member), or sharing information with another student during an examination (unless specifically approved by the faculty member). Other examples include intentionally allowing another student to view one’s own examination and collaboration before or after an examination if such collaboration is specifically forbidden by the faculty member.
• Unauthorized Collaboration: Submission for academic credit of a work product, or a part thereof, represented as its being one’s own effort, which has been developed in substantial collaboration with another person or source, or computer-based resource, is a violation of academic honesty. It is also a violation of academic honesty knowingly to provide such assistance. Collaborative work specifically authorized by a faculty member is allowed.
• Falsification: It is a violation of academic honesty to misrepresent material or fabricate information in an academic exercise, assignment or proceeding (e.g., false or misleading citation of sources, the falsification of the results of experiments or of computer data, false or misleading information in an academic context in order to gain an unfair advantage).
• Multiple Submissions: It is a violation of academic honesty to submit substantial portions of the same work for credit more than once without the explicit consent of the faculty member(s) to whom the material is submitted for additional credit. In cases in which there is a natural development of research or knowledge in a sequence of courses, use of prior work may be desirable, even required; however the student is responsible for indicating in writing, as a part of such use, that the current work submitted for credit is cumulative in nature.

Assignments & Grading

Class Attendance & Participation: (15%, 150pts.)

• Attendance in class and at film screenings.
• Preparation for class, in addition to the quantity and quality of class discussions.
• Any in-class assignments/quizzes are included within this grade.

Close Textual Analysis: 1,600 words (10%, 100 pts.) DUE: 2/20 [DOWNLOAD ASSIGNMENT]

• You will select ONE among several questions.
• Your analysis will address the formal elements (mise-en-scène, cinematography, editing, etc.) in one scene from a film and how these formal elements connect with and exemplify a theoretical concept.
• Your analysis must do the following:
  • Clearly state what line of inquiry you are going to pursue (What formal elements are you looking at? What function do you think they perform? To what effect?)
  • Describe the scene in relation to your line of inquiry. (e.g. You should not describe aspects of the sequence that will not support your argument, which means no plot summaries.)
  • Summarize your argument/findings in a few paragraphs by outlining what the film’s formal elements can tell us about the theoretical concept(s) the essay question is asking you to consider.

Mid-Term Exam (15%, 150 pts.) IN CLASS on 3/6 [10 TERMS DOWNLOAD]

• An essay format in-class exam on definitions/descriptions of theoretical concepts. No make-up exams are allowed.
• 10 concepts will be provided in advance; 5 will be selected to appear on the exam.
• You need to answer all 5 questions by making reference to: 1) a specific theorist, and 2) a specific scene in one of the films seen in class.

Paper Proposal & Annotated Bibliography, at least 2,000 words (10%, 100 pts.) DUE: 3/27

• Note: Before Spring Break, you must meet with me during office hours to receive approval for your paper topic. I will not read paper proposals that have not been previously approved by me. I will help you focus your interests during this meeting but will not write a research question for you.
• This assignment constitutes the first draft of your final paper. Make it as strong as you can, so that I can provide adequate feedback for you to incorporate to your final paper. If the paper topic has not been approved by me there will be no feedback given.
• For your proposal:
  • You will identify a (theoretical) research question to ask about a film of your choice (to be approved by me). Then you will outline how you can answer this question by indicating theoretical concept(s) at stake in your question and indicating which cinematic elements will be discussed to address these concepts. (2-3 paragraphs)
  • You will then write a close analysis on a scene from this film to illustrate either 1) what prompted your research question, or 2) how you will begin to answer your research question. (approx. 1,200 words).
• For your annotated bibliography (2-3 pages):
  • You will select 4 scholarly sources to support the answer to your question.
  • You can use no more than 2 sources from the syllabus.
  • Each source is annotated by including one paragraph summarizing the main argument, followed by one paragraph explaining why this source will help you answer your research question. For more info on “annotated bibliographies,” see this helpful guide: How to Prepare an Annotated Bibliography | olinuris.library.cornell.edu

In-Class Presentation (5%, 50 pts.) IN CLASS on 4/24

• 5-6 minute presentation on your final paper topic.
• Your presentation should include:
  • A brief summary of your main research question and/or thesis (should be informed by the film theories you are addressing).
  • A brief summary of 2-3 main arguments you will use to answer your research question and/or support your thesis (including film theories you will address and the cinematic techniques you will explore in your close analysis).
  • A clip from your film (no more than 1 minute). You will show the clip, provide an example of close textual analysis you will complete in your final paper, and connect your analysis to a film theory in support of your broad argument/thesis.

Final Exam (15%, 150 pts.) IN CLASS on 4/29 [10 TERMS DOWNLOAD]

• Same format as the midterm: 10 concepts will be provided in advance and 5 of them will appear on exam. You must answer all five questions.

Final Paper, 2,500 words (30%, 300pts.) DUE: 5/3, E-Mailed by 5pm.

Submission/format instructions:

• Due: Submitted via E-Mail before 5pm on May 3, 2013.
• Length: 2,500 – 2,800 words (excluding you words in your bibliography).
  • File format: PDF
  • File name: “Last Name First Name – Assignment Name” (e.g. “Cannon Kris – Close Analysis”)
  • Document structure/format: cover page for the first page (including pertinent information like the assignment title, your name, the course name and my name), double-spaced, and 12-pt. font. Here is an example.

Your paper should do the following:

• Provide an argument about how your film illustrates/engages with 1-2 film theories we have addressed throughout the course. (This argument should aim to answer the research question you included in your proposal).
• Support your argument through close textual analysis of no more than 3 scenes in the film. Your close analysis should address various cinematic techniques we have explored throughout the semester (e.g. mise-en-scene, cinematography, editing, sound design, etc.). If you feel your analysis must engage in analysis with more than 3 scenes, please contact me for approval.
• Include a minimum of 6 scholarly/peer-reviewed sources to support your arguments and/or close textual analysis.
  • At least 2 of these sources should not be listed as a required reading from this course, but sources listed as “background readings” in the syllabus are acceptable.
  • All sources must be used within the body of the paper (paraphrased or quoted) and properly cited within the text.
• Include a bibliography listing all sources you have quoted/paraphrased throughout the paper. The bibliography should follow the same citation style guide you used to cite your sources in the body of your paper.
  • NOTE: The bibliography does not count toward your the word-count in your final paper.

Your paper will be graded according to the following criteria (I will elaborate upon these in class):

• Completed according to instructions.
• Completed on time (5% deducted if your paper is turned in up to 24 hours after it was due. An additional 3% is deducted for every additional day your paper is late.)
• Technical language quality (grammar, mechanics, technical mistakes, proper citation format, etc.)
• Stylistic language quality (syntax, word choices, tone, smoothly incorporate sources into the text, etc.)
• Organization of argument (effectiveness of argument, including structure and logic, etc.)
• Strength of Argument (thesis is a clear argument to answer your research question, meaningfully relates a film’s style to issue(s) in film theory, etc.)
• Focus of close textual analysis (precise/accurate terminology, focused/purposeful analysis of most relevant details, NO plot summary/synopsis, etc.)

 

Grade Scale:

A+: 98-100 (e.g. 980-1000 pts.)
A: 94-97
A-: 90-93
B+: 87-89
B: 84-86
B-: 80-83
C+: 77-79
C: 74-76
C-: 70-73
D: 61-69
F: 60 & below.

As you can see, an A+ grade is possible but must meet the following expectations: perfect scores, perfect attendance, and rigorous, exciting scholarship.

Course Timeline

1/14 Introduction: Course Syllabus; What is theory? What is criticism?

First Day Handout
SCREENING: None.

1/16 Introduction: Film as Text, Cinema as Language

READ:

• Roland Barthes, “From Work to Text,” from Image Music Text (London: Fontana Press, 1977): 155-164.
• Roland Barthes, “Death of the Author,” from Image Music Text (London: Fontana Press, 1977): 142-149.

Background:

• André Bazin, “The Evolution of the Language of Cinema” and “The Myth of Total Cinema,” from What Is Cinema, Volume 1. Found in Braudy and Cohen (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 7th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009): 41-53; 163-166.
• David N. Rodowick, “Film Begets Video” and “The Death of Cinema and the Birth of Film Studies” from The Virtual Life of Film (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007): 26-31.

NOTE: 1/18 is the last day to drop classes

1/21 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. HOLIDAY — No classes

VIEW BEFORE NEXT CLASS: Vertigo (Hitchcock, 1958, 128’)      Amazon Rental  |  Amazon Purchase  |  iTunes

1/23 Introduction: Film Theory & Criticism

READ:

• Elsaesser & Hagener (hereafter E&H), “Introduction,” in Film Theory: An Introduction to the Senses.
• Kriss Ravetto-Biagioli, “Vertigo and the Vertiginous History of Film Theory,” Camera Obscura 25.3 (2011): 101-141.

1/28 Cinema as Window and Frame: Realism & Formalism

SCREENING: Standard Operating Procedure (Morris, 2008, 116’)
READ:

• E&H, “Chapter 1”

Background:

• Linda Williams, “Cluster Fuck: The Forcible Frame in Errol Morris’s Standard Operating Procedure,” Camera Obscura 25.1 (2010): 29-67.

1/30 Film, Photography, and Mechanical Reproduction

READ:

• Andre Bazin, “The Ontology of the Photographic Image” from What is Cinema, Volume 1. Found in Found in Braudy and Cohen (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 7th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009): 159-162.
• Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.” Found in Braudy and Cohen (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 7th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009): 665-685.

Background:

• Laura U. Marks, “How Electrons Remember,” in Touch: Sensuous Theory and Multisensory Media (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002): 161-176.
• Hugh S. Manon, “Qui Perd Gagne: Failure and Cinematic Seduction,” International Journal of Žižek Studies 1.3 (2007). Available online.

2/4 Cinema as Door – Screen and Threshold

SCREENING: The Royal Tenenbaums (Anderson, 2001, 110’)
READ:

• E&H, “Chapter 2”
• Stanley Cavell, “Photograph and Screen” from The World Viewed. Found in Braudy and Cohen (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 7th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009): 304.

Background:

• David N. Rodowick, “A Medium in All Things,” “Automatisms and Art,” and “Automatism and Photography” from The Virtual Life of Film (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007): 31-52.

2/6 Cinema as Door – Screen and Threshold

READ:

• David Bordwell, “Classical Narration” in Bordwell, Staiger, & Thompson (Eds.) The Classical Hollywood Cinema: Film Style & Mode of Production to 1960 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1985): 24-41. NOTE: While reading this chapter, look for examples or traits of classical narration rather than focusing on examples.
• Christian Metz, “Some Points on the Semiotics of Cinema,” from What is Cinema, Volume 1. Found in Mast, Cohen, and Braudy (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 4th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992): 168-178.

2/11 Cinema as Mirror and Face

SCREENING: All About Eve (Mankiewicz, 1950, 138’)
READ:

• E&H, “Chapter 3”

2/13 Cinema as Mirror and Face

READ:

• Christian Metz, “Identification, Mirror” from The Imaginary Signifier. Found in Braudy and Cohen (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 7th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009): 694-700.

Background:

• Béla Balász, “The Close-Up,” from Theory of the Film. Found in Braudy and Cohen (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 7th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009): 275-281.

2/18 Cinema as Eye – Look and Gaze

SCREENING: Pickpocket (Bresson, 1959, 75’)
READ:

• E&H, “Chapter 4.”

Background:

• André Bazin, “An Aesthetic of Reality: Neorealism,” from What is Cinema, Volume 2 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005): 16-40.
• Kaja Silverman, “[On Suture],” from The Subject of Semiotics. Found in Mast, Cohen, and Braudy (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 4th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992): 199-209.

2/20 CLOSE TEXTUAL ANALYSIS DUE

Discuss Midterm Exam Terms [DOWNLOAD TERMS]

2/25 Cinema as Eye – The Cinematic Apparatus & The Panoptic Gaze

SCREENING: Peeping Tom (Powell, 1960, 101’)
READ:

• Jean-Louis Baudry, “Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematographic Apparatus.” Found in Mast, Cohen, and Braudy (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 4th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992): 302-312.
• Michel Foucault, “Docile Bodies,” from Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison (New York: Vintage Books, 1995 [1977]): 135-169.

2/27 Cinema as Eye – Feminist Theory & The Male Gaze

READ:

• Laura Mulvey, “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema,” in Kaplan (Ed.) Feminism and Film (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000): 34-47.

3/4 Cinema as Eye – Feminist Theory & The Male Gaze

SCREENING: Blue Velvet (Lynch, 1986, 120’)
READ:

• E. Ann Kaplan, “Is the Gaze Male?” in Kaplan (Ed.) Feminism and Film (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000): 119-138.
• Todd McGowan. “The Sexual Relationship with David Lynch,” in The Real Gaze: Film Theory After Lacan (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2007): 203-210.

NOTE: 3/5 is the semester mid-point & last day to withdraw from classes.

3/6 IN-CLASS MIDTERM EXAM

3/10 Cinema as Skin and Touch

SCREENING: The Skin I Live In (Almodóvar, 2011, 120’)
READ:

• E&H, “Chapter 5”

Background:

• Peter Lehman. “Crying Over the Melodramatic Penis,” in Masculinity: Bodies, Movies, Culture (New York: Routledge, 2001).

3/12 Cinema as Skin and Touch

READ:

• Vivian Sobchack, “What My Fingers Knew: The Cinesthetic Subject, or Vision in the Flesh,” in Carnal Thoughts: Embodiment and Moving Image Culture (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004): 53-84.

3/18-3/22 SPRING BREAK — No Classes

3/25 Cinema as Skin and Touch

SCREENING: Precious, Based on the Novel “Push” (Daniels, 2009, 110’)
READ:

• Alessandra Raengo, “Shadowboxing: Lee Daniel’s Nonrepresentational Cinema,” in Mask (Ed.) Contemporary Black American Cinema: Race, Gender and Sexuality at the Movies (New York: Routledge, 2012): 200-216.

3/27 MEETINGS ABOUT FINAL PAPER PROPOSAL

**NOTE: Meetings will be held at Saxby’s Coffee in Library North.**

4/1 Cinema as Ear: Acoustics and Space

SCREENING: The Hours (Daldry, 2002, 114’)
READ:

• E&H, “Chapter 6”

4/3 Cinema as Ear: Acoustics and Space

PAPER PROPOSAL WITH ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY DUE

READ:

• Metz, “Aural Objects.” Found in Mast, Cohen, and Braudy (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 4th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992): 313-316.
• Barthes, “The Grain of the Voice,” from Image Music Text (London: Fontana Press, 1977): 179-189.
• Michel Chion, “The Acousmetre,” from Audio-Vision: Sound on Screen (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994): 129-131.

Background:

• Michel Chion, “Projections of Sound on Image,” from Audio-Vision: Sound on Screen (New York: Columbia University Press, 1994): 3-24.

4/8 Cinema as Brain: Mind and Body

SCREENING: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (Gondry, 2004, 108’)
READ:

• E&H, “Chapter 7.”

4/10 Cinema as Brain: Mind and Body

READ:

• Deleuze, “The Brain is the Screen: An Interview with Gilles Deleuze,” in Flaxman (Ed.) The Brain is the Screen: Deleuze and the Philosophy of Cinema (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000): 365-374.

4/15 Digital vs. Analog Cinema

SCREENING: Minority Report (Spielberg, 2002, 145’)
READ:

• E&H, “Conclusion.”

4/17 Digital vs. Analog Cinema

Discuss Final Exam Terms [Download Terms]
READ:

• Laura U. Marks “Video’s Body, Analog and Digital,” in Touch: Sensuous Theory and Multisensory Media (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002): 147-160
• Manovich, “The Synthetic Image and Its Subject,” from The Language of New Media. Found in Braudy and Cohen (Eds.) Film Theory and Criticism, 7th Edition (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009): 785-794.

4/22 Digital vs. Analog Cinema

SCREENING: None
READ:

• TBA.

4/24 IN-CLASS PRESENTATIONS

4/29 IN-CLASS FINAL EXAM

5/3 FINAL PAPERS DUE