Sad Truth or Funny Fiction? (Part 2)

Here's a simple question with a not-so-simple answer. If American Movie was a spoof - if it was a fake documentary comedy - how would your reaction to the film be changed? And if This Is Spinal Tap was a real documentry, how would your reaction to that film be changed?

" This goes to eleven! "

Sad Truth or Funny Fiction? (Part 1)

When you told me you'd like to study a comedy this semester, I decided we should do two: American Movie and This Is Spinal Tap. I thought we could cover more ground that way. When we're done with the unit, you can say you saw (1) a documentary, (2) a parody, (3) a dark comedy, and (4) a straight comedy. So that's one reason why we're watching Tap.

There's another reason. There's one simple rule about parody that most recent parodies miss completely, and I'd like you to learn the rule. Ready? Here is comes...

The more similar a parody is to its source material,
the funnier it is.

That's it. That's the secret. And that's the reason why so many parodies are just...not...funny. For example:

Do you think this movie...

...actually looks like this movie?

And do you think this movie...

...looks anything like this movie?

You can tell just from the posters that the filmmakers have absolutely no idea what they're doing. If you want to make a funny horror movie, then you have to make a movie that actually looks like a horror movie! Or a superhero movie! Or a disaster movie! Or a romance! Or a...whatever!

Check out this next bunch. Can you guess which is NOT the parody?

Exactly. In fact, I'm not so sure they all aren't parodies. One more time.  Can you tell which of the following is the 21st century parody, and which are the 1970s originals?

You can barely tell. That's because the filmmakers understood the foundation of what they were making fun of; they weren't simply taking cheap shots at the most obvious aspects of their satiric target.

This is why I think This Is Spinal Tap is so successful. I think it looks, sounds, and feels like a real documentary. So, do you agree? Give some support to your response. Pick some moments from the film that either feel very real, or not real at all. Compare it to moments of American Movie in terms of realism and tone.

Also, can you think of any other parodies that support my rule? In other words, can you think of any parodies that work because that look and feel like their source material, and can you think of any that fail because they don't? Hey, can you think of any that break my rule? That I'd be interested in hearing about!

Independent Viewing Project Criteria

Here are the criteria for your Independent Viewing Project. Remember, you have one of these due per grading quarter. Any you hand in after that will be extra credit. You may only hand in one per week, and you may not use any film that you have seen prior to this class. There are a wide variety of films on the list, so be sure to select one that is appropriate for you. If you need any help selecting a film, see your instructor. Click on the images to enlarge.

American Movie - Tragic Comedy or Comedic Tragedy?

This will probably be your last formal writing assingment for the quarter, so make it good. It's worth 50 points.

Task
In a one-to-two page essay, answer the following question:

Is American Movie a tragic comedy or a comedic tragedy?

Format
This is a formal essay, so beware of grammar, punctuation, tense, language usage, spelling, etc. It all counts.

Content
You're going to want to do a few things in your essay. You'll want to have a thesis stating your central claim - basically answering affirmative or negative to the question. You'll want to define your terms. Just what is a tragedy and a comedy? (The previoud blog entry should be very helpful.) You'll want to support your response with evidence from the film. You might want to address elements of the opposing side of your arguments. What counter arguments might someone who disagrees with you address? Address them yourself.  Be sure to consider the entire movie when crafting your response. Was the last day's viewing sadder than the first and second? Maybe. Does that instanly make it a tragedy? How does one even determine if the ending is sad or not? Mark is still pretty pittiful, but he completes his filmand makes good on all of his promises. So think about it.

If you'd like to review parts of the film, it will be available in the IMC at the front desk. You can check it out for a period and view it in the AV lab in the back of the IMC. If you have any questions, please ask.

Final Exam

Here's a definition of auteur from Wikipedia:

The term auteur (French for author) is used to describe film directors (or, more rarely, producers, or writers) who are considered to have a distinctive, recognizable style, because they (a) repeatedly return to the same subject matter, (b) habitually address a particular psychological or moral theme, (c) employ a recurring visual and aesthetic style, or (d) demonstrate any combination of the above. In theory, an auteur's films are identifiable regardless of their genre. The term was first applied in its cinematic sense in François Truffaut's 1954 essay "A Certain Tendency of the French Cinema."

Your task? 1. Research and study an auteur of your choice.  2. Compose a written report.  3. Share your findings with the class in a 15-20 minute presentation.

Part 1 - Research
You'll want to collect a variety of sources to educate yourself on your director. These sources can include books, print interviews, video interviews, newspaper and magazine articles, journals, websites, etc. Just be sure that each of your sources are reliable. (Note: Wikipedia is a good source to find further sources. Look to see at the bottom of the entry where the Wikipedia author got his or her source, and check it out for yourself.) Be sure to use the IMC's access to old newspaper and periodical articles, found here. Another resource you might find helpful is the special features on the DVDs of the director's movies. You might find helpful interviews or commentaries.

Part 2 - Composition
Your written report should contain the following components:

1. a brief biography with significant childhood or educational moments (Why and how did this person become a filmmaker?)
2. professional history, including significant films, awards, honors (What has he or she done?)
3. central aesthetic, thematic, stylistic approaches (What makes this director's films special?)
4. a review of a significant film from the auteur (What movie did you watch, and what did you think of it?)

You must cite all of the sources you use! Include cited quotations and a list your cited works in MLA format. If you have any quesitons regarding correct citation, please check with your teacher, the TLC, or a librarian.

Part 3 - Presentation
Your presentation should include an abreviated version of your report. In addition, you should show at least one short clip from the movie you viewed (less than 3 minutes) and comment on the clip(s). A visual aid would probably be helpful. Consider using a PowerPoint presentation or a handout.

Here's a list of auteurs from which you can choose. The list is by no means complete. If you have one you'd like to write about who is not on the list, please okay it with me first. Be sure that you can find ample research on your selection. If you can't, try another. Wikipedia will probably give you a good idea of what each on the list has done, so that might be a good place to start looking just to pick. If you still don't know whom to pick, takl with your instructor. When you select one, let everyone know who you've chosen by posting your name and the director's name in the comments section of this entry. It's first come, first served, no repeats - so act fast.

• Akira Kurosawa
• Alfred Hitchcock
• Billy Wilder
• Brad Bird
• Brian DePalma
• Buster Keaton
• Cecil B. DeMille
• Charlie Chaplin
• Clint Eastwood
• D.W. Griffith
• David Cronenberg
• David Fincher
• Don Siegel
• Ed Wood
• Federico Fellini
• Francis Ford Coppola
• Francois Truffaut
• Frank Capra
• Fritz Lang
• George Romero
• George Roy Hill
• Guy Maddin
• Hayao Miyazaki
• Howard Hawks
• Ingmar Bergman
• James Cameron
• James Whale
• Joel and Ethan Cohen
• John Carpenter
• John Ford
• John Frankenheimer
• John Huston
• Johnnie To
• Kathryn Bigelow
• Katsuhiro Ōtomo
• Martin Scorsese
• Mel Brooks
• Michael Curtiz
• Michel Mann
• Mike Nichols
• Milos Forman
• Oliver Stone
• Orson Welles
• Quentin Tarantino
• Raoul Walsh
• Ridley Scott
• Robert Altman
• Robert Rodriguez
• Robert Zemeckis
• Roger Corman
• Roman Polanski
• Ron Howard
• Sam Peckinpah
• Sergei Eisenstein
• Sergio Leone
• Sidney Lumet
• Sophia Coppola
• Spike Lee
• Stanley Kubrick
• Steven Soderbergh
• Steven Spielberg
• Sydney Pollack
• Terry Gilliam
• Tim Burton
• Victor Fleming
• Walt Disney
• Walter Hill
• Werner Herzog
• William Wyler
• Winsor McCay
• Woody Allen
• Yimou Zhang

As always, if you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask

Defining Tragedy and Comedy

These two masks symbolize "the theater," they symbolize "drama." They are the facew of comedy and tragedy, two sides of the same coin. Comedy and tragedy can, at times, be pretty easy to differentiate from one another.

This character is tragic.

This one is comedic.

Can you  figure out the rest?

Sometimes it's not so easy to tell the difference between the two.

Your task: As a class, define "tragedy" and define "comedy".

Now, this is step one of a two-part process. The better you do here, the better you'll do on part two. Feel free to snowball off of your classmates' ideas and be sure to discuss what parts of their definitions work and don't work. By the end of the comment page, you as a class should have a prety good working defiintion of both comedy and tragedy.

Note: We're not defining sad and happy, so don't over simplify your answers. Get specific, and choose your words carefully. Use whatever resources you like, just be sure to cite them in your comments. Also, to get this right, you'll likely want to comment several times to help your classmates refine the two definitions.

Good luck!