One may also look at the casting of 500 Days of Summer and expect to align with Tom due to being played by a big Hollywood actor. However, the film incorporates notions of gender trouble; challenging the preconceived notions of gender in the film. The spectator may assume that Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character will be stereotypically masculine, resulting in gender trouble.
Tuesday, 3 March 2015
Queer Gaze Theory: 500 Days of Summer: Butler and Rucas
Judith Butler suggests that gender is not biological, but socially constructed. This can link to aspects and themes in 500 Days of Summer. Most significantly in the scene with Tom and Summer in the pancake house. Here, Summer describes her relationship with Tom as Sid and Nancy, then correcting Tom for thinking that he would automatically be labelled as Sid due to his gender. However, this is subverted when Summer describes that she is the masculine, she is Sid. This therefore can relate to Butler's theory, that gender is merely a performance rather than something biological. As a result of this, men may not align with Tom due to his femininity, and therefore through Butler's theory, through his gender performance. This would result in the spectator adapting to a negotiated reading of the film: Although we see the film through Tom's perspective, one may not feel allegiance and therefore align with him, even if the spectator has the same biological gender, as he may not have the same gender performance.
Tuesday 3rd March 2015
Queer Theory
-Emerged in the 1990s - when homosexuality became socially accepted
- Explores the way that heterosexuality is explored as normal
-Representation of gay men and women in the media
-Challenges the oppositional divide between gay and heterosexuality
Judith Butler 1999
-Suggests gender is not the result of nature but it is socially constructed
-Male and female behaviour roles are not the result of biology but are constructed by society (This could link to 500 Days of Summer Sid and Nancy)
-Sees gender as a performance
-Men in the audience may not align with Tom due to his femininity, whilst vice versa with Summer = negotiated oppositional reading. Aligned with Tom through the director and narrative, but maybe not due to his femininity.
-Any behaviour that disrupts notions of gender - preconceived notions of gender = gender trouble (feminine, damsel in distress etc)
History
-1950s police actively enforced laws that prohibited sexual activities between men
-Sexually abnormal and deviant = marginalised
-1967 homosexuality is decriminalised in UK - India 2009
-In parts of Africa and Asia today is still punishable to death
-1977 refers to homosexuality of as a mental illness - not taken down till 1990
Queer theory suggests there are different ways of interpreting contemporary media texts
Queer theory can be applied to texts when heterosexuality is the dominant.
Queer theory suggests a movement towards an increasing tolerance although heterosexuality is still a norm.
Brokeback Mountain, 2006
-Success of this Hollywood film is an indication of more progressive attitudes to homosexuality
-For some, the film challenges two quintessential traditional images of American masculinity - the cowboy and the fishing trip
-The queer gaze here becomes the dominant active gaze rather than the oppositional gaze.
Homosexual films = desire + empathy of coming out
Heterosexual films = desire
"...being’ a lesbian is always a kind of miming, a vain effort to participate in the phantasmatic plenitude of naturalized heterosexuality which will always and only fail (Butler, 312.)” Butler is arguing that homosexuality imitates heterosexuality’s defining gender roles. That a butch lesbian is imitating a man because of her masculine qualities that only belong to a man, so she must be a fake in order be in the gender realm. The same goes for feminine gay men and even butch gay men whose hyper masculinity is a play on heterosexual masculinity pushed to the edges. So gender must be a societal construct that constantly emulates the heterosexual definitions of masculinity and femininity in order to differentiate between the sexes. When homosexual people enter the gender binary, they must imitate these norms in their relationship, but will always fail." [https://yourboyfriendsucks.wordpress.com/2011/09/17/of-mulvery-butler-and-the-homosexual-gaze/]
Homosexuality imitates the heterosexual qualities, the gay woman imitating the man/homosexual relationships are based on heterosexual relationships
Butler: drag is the only way to show the performativity of gender
Homosexual Male Gaze:
Homosexuals must align with women in cinema, to do so they must be transexual, disregarding their gender and sexuality -> heterosexual male
Derek Rucas
"Rucas is claiming that the homosexual male gaze can only come through the female perspective in cinema that our gaze, because it is a male one, overpowers her and her desire becomes our desire. The homosexual gaze is not transsvestivism, but rather a channeling through an outlet of the female desire for the male character, thus objectifying him while he is objectifying her. Because the homosexual gaze overpowers the female gaze, we are essentially turning her into a commodity to look at heterosexual men with. A kaleidoscope, if you will, that alters the perception of the film in our favour to turn a sexual being whose gaze is stronger than the female counterpart and meeting that gaze with an equally strong gaze through the woman."
When the homosexual man puts himself as the woman, when the male gazes at her, he sees it as him being gazed at.
However, Rucas is criticised to being restricted to heterosexual films.
Homosexual films = not just sexual desire, but also emotional, when they explore the process of being gay
When a gay person watches a gay film, it brings about a much more emotional response, bringing about empathy of the coming out process.
-Emerged in the 1990s - when homosexuality became socially accepted
- Explores the way that heterosexuality is explored as normal
-Representation of gay men and women in the media
-Challenges the oppositional divide between gay and heterosexuality
Judith Butler 1999
-Suggests gender is not the result of nature but it is socially constructed
-Male and female behaviour roles are not the result of biology but are constructed by society (This could link to 500 Days of Summer Sid and Nancy)
-Sees gender as a performance
-Men in the audience may not align with Tom due to his femininity, whilst vice versa with Summer = negotiated oppositional reading. Aligned with Tom through the director and narrative, but maybe not due to his femininity.
-Any behaviour that disrupts notions of gender - preconceived notions of gender = gender trouble (feminine, damsel in distress etc)
History
-1950s police actively enforced laws that prohibited sexual activities between men
-Sexually abnormal and deviant = marginalised
-1967 homosexuality is decriminalised in UK - India 2009
-In parts of Africa and Asia today is still punishable to death
-1977 refers to homosexuality of as a mental illness - not taken down till 1990
Queer theory suggests there are different ways of interpreting contemporary media texts
Queer theory can be applied to texts when heterosexuality is the dominant.
Queer theory suggests a movement towards an increasing tolerance although heterosexuality is still a norm.
Brokeback Mountain, 2006
-Success of this Hollywood film is an indication of more progressive attitudes to homosexuality
-For some, the film challenges two quintessential traditional images of American masculinity - the cowboy and the fishing trip
-The queer gaze here becomes the dominant active gaze rather than the oppositional gaze.
Homosexual films = desire + empathy of coming out
Heterosexual films = desire
"...being’ a lesbian is always a kind of miming, a vain effort to participate in the phantasmatic plenitude of naturalized heterosexuality which will always and only fail (Butler, 312.)” Butler is arguing that homosexuality imitates heterosexuality’s defining gender roles. That a butch lesbian is imitating a man because of her masculine qualities that only belong to a man, so she must be a fake in order be in the gender realm. The same goes for feminine gay men and even butch gay men whose hyper masculinity is a play on heterosexual masculinity pushed to the edges. So gender must be a societal construct that constantly emulates the heterosexual definitions of masculinity and femininity in order to differentiate between the sexes. When homosexual people enter the gender binary, they must imitate these norms in their relationship, but will always fail." [https://yourboyfriendsucks.wordpress.com/2011/09/17/of-mulvery-butler-and-the-homosexual-gaze/]
Homosexuality imitates the heterosexual qualities, the gay woman imitating the man/homosexual relationships are based on heterosexual relationships
Butler: drag is the only way to show the performativity of gender
Homosexual Male Gaze:
Homosexuals must align with women in cinema, to do so they must be transexual, disregarding their gender and sexuality -> heterosexual male
Derek Rucas
"Rucas is claiming that the homosexual male gaze can only come through the female perspective in cinema that our gaze, because it is a male one, overpowers her and her desire becomes our desire. The homosexual gaze is not transsvestivism, but rather a channeling through an outlet of the female desire for the male character, thus objectifying him while he is objectifying her. Because the homosexual gaze overpowers the female gaze, we are essentially turning her into a commodity to look at heterosexual men with. A kaleidoscope, if you will, that alters the perception of the film in our favour to turn a sexual being whose gaze is stronger than the female counterpart and meeting that gaze with an equally strong gaze through the woman."
When the homosexual man puts himself as the woman, when the male gazes at her, he sees it as him being gazed at.
However, Rucas is criticised to being restricted to heterosexual films.
Homosexual films = not just sexual desire, but also emotional, when they explore the process of being gay
When a gay person watches a gay film, it brings about a much more emotional response, bringing about empathy of the coming out process.
Monday, 2 March 2015
500 Days of Summer Feminist theories
Marc Webb's 500 Days of Summer, 2009, explores a relationship between two characters; Tom and Summer. The film is portrayed only through Tom's perspective and therefore the male gaze is throughly incorporated into the film. It also means that the spectator must make a conscious decision if he/she wishes to view the film through Summer's alternative perspective. The film explores Tom constantly wanting to develop his relationship with Summer further; from speaking to sex to becoming his girlfriend. However, when it comes to this final outcome, we see that this is only wanted from Tom.
Based upon the theories of Freud, Bellor and Metz, Laura Mulvey focuses on the male gaze and how women are the subject of the film, only there for visual pleasure. She argued that because film is dominated by the male perspective, this results in the spectator viewing the woman through the sexualised male perspective. As 500 Days of Summer is portrayed only through Tom's perspective, Summer is sexualised and is introduced through close ups of her body. The narrator describes Summer as having the average height but with a slightly larger shoe size. Summer is sexualised from the beginning of the film as she is described as completely normal and average, but that there is something about Summer that men are attracted to. We see Summer walk through the bus to her seat, and every single man double taking at Summer's appearance. This therefore makes Summer an object solely for sexual visual pleasure. The narrator describes this as "The Summer Effect" incorporating high levels of voyeurism from the male. This scene also has a strong theme of the 1950s, the scene is filmed in black and white and incorporates Summer in a typical 1950s mid length skirt, her hair tied with a bow whilst riding a bike. This reinstalls an aspect of male control and the sexualised, submissive woman. This is similar in the ikea scene, when Tom and Summer pretend to be husband and wife, typical of the 1950s; the wife who cooks and waits on the husband.
Mulvey's theory of the male gaze can also be seen prominently in the dance scene. Previously, Tom has just slept with Summer, which cuts to the scene where Tom is celebrating whilst walking to work, with other passers by joining in, all celebrating Tom's success in sleeping with Summer. We do not see Summer's perspective on the couple's sex. The mise en scene in this particular scene also incorporates a masculine theme, reinforcing the male gaze further into the film. Tom and the rest of the passers by all wear blue clothing, which is typically deemed as masculine colour through colour psychology.
Kaplan argues that the spectator aligns with the male in the film as the narrative is portrayed through the dominant male perspective. She argues that the spectator must make a conscious decision to align with the female in the film. This theory therefore can link to my previous point as if the spectator wants to align with Summer, he/she must make a conscious decision to do so. For example, in the scene when Summer finally opens up to Tom about her inner thoughts, the spectator will not be able to subconsciously align with Summer as the male narrator speaks over the top of Summer, making it so we cannot hear what she is saying, but instead what Tom feels about Summer telling him her secrets. The spectator can only align with Summer, if he/she makes a conscious effort to do so. For example, one may consciously align with Summer as she does not gain a voice, however if we only view the film through the subconscious male gaze, the spectator may not align with Summer, as the audience cannot hear her perspective.
One may adapt to a negotiated reading of the film; if the spectator is not white, male or straight. Although the film is portrayed through Tom's perspective, if the spectator is not a white, straight male he/she may not feel allegiance towards Tom, disregarding the fact the film is told through his perspective. This may mean that the spectator is more inclined to view the film through alternate perspectives, such as Summer's. Therefore resulting in a negotiated reading as this would not have been the director's necessary intention.
When the female character in film becomes the dominant, she is usually punished as a result of this, usually resulting in her life. In other words, when the male gaze is subverted and film is viewed through the eyes of the woman, she is usually punished in some way. It is therefore usually more difficult to align with this character as she has broken out of her conventional role. One may argue that this is not applicable to 500 Days of Summer as for one, it is not portrayed through Summer's perspective, and two, she is not punished. However, others may argue that Summer is punished through audience response and therefore as a result of this, Williams' theory of the dominant gaze does apply. Another alternative view could be that 500 Days of Summer subverts this theory and reverses it; because the film is told through Tom's perspective, he is punished. This could apply as we see throughout the film that Tom takes on the submissive more feminine role, whilst Summer adapts to the more masculine role. We see this through the scene in the pancake house, when Summer describes the two as Sid and Nancy, then corrects Tom for thinking that he is Sid, when actually she describes herself as Sid. Therefore if we see Tom as the female, the dominant gaze can apply to the film as he is punished towards the end of the film by not getting Summer and going through his torture of her engagement party. Moreover, another interpretation of Williams' theory on this film could be that Summer is actually punished at the end of the film as she ends up caught in a marriage, which she states at the beginning of the film that she does not want.
In conclusion, the film 500 Days of Summer seems to be a male dominated film, if the spectator takes on a preferred reading of the film, not making a conscious decision to view the film through the eyes of the female. We see aspects of voyeurism and the male gaze throughout the film, whilst it being portrayed by a male protagonist throughout. However, a spectator could also take on a negotiated reading of the film if he/she was to take a conscious decision to align with the female character(s) such as Summer. Overall, it depends on the spectator's allegiance and alignment with the characters and whether they adapt to a negotiated or preferred reading of the film.
Based upon the theories of Freud, Bellor and Metz, Laura Mulvey focuses on the male gaze and how women are the subject of the film, only there for visual pleasure. She argued that because film is dominated by the male perspective, this results in the spectator viewing the woman through the sexualised male perspective. As 500 Days of Summer is portrayed only through Tom's perspective, Summer is sexualised and is introduced through close ups of her body. The narrator describes Summer as having the average height but with a slightly larger shoe size. Summer is sexualised from the beginning of the film as she is described as completely normal and average, but that there is something about Summer that men are attracted to. We see Summer walk through the bus to her seat, and every single man double taking at Summer's appearance. This therefore makes Summer an object solely for sexual visual pleasure. The narrator describes this as "The Summer Effect" incorporating high levels of voyeurism from the male. This scene also has a strong theme of the 1950s, the scene is filmed in black and white and incorporates Summer in a typical 1950s mid length skirt, her hair tied with a bow whilst riding a bike. This reinstalls an aspect of male control and the sexualised, submissive woman. This is similar in the ikea scene, when Tom and Summer pretend to be husband and wife, typical of the 1950s; the wife who cooks and waits on the husband.
Mulvey's theory of the male gaze can also be seen prominently in the dance scene. Previously, Tom has just slept with Summer, which cuts to the scene where Tom is celebrating whilst walking to work, with other passers by joining in, all celebrating Tom's success in sleeping with Summer. We do not see Summer's perspective on the couple's sex. The mise en scene in this particular scene also incorporates a masculine theme, reinforcing the male gaze further into the film. Tom and the rest of the passers by all wear blue clothing, which is typically deemed as masculine colour through colour psychology.
Kaplan argues that the spectator aligns with the male in the film as the narrative is portrayed through the dominant male perspective. She argues that the spectator must make a conscious decision to align with the female in the film. This theory therefore can link to my previous point as if the spectator wants to align with Summer, he/she must make a conscious decision to do so. For example, in the scene when Summer finally opens up to Tom about her inner thoughts, the spectator will not be able to subconsciously align with Summer as the male narrator speaks over the top of Summer, making it so we cannot hear what she is saying, but instead what Tom feels about Summer telling him her secrets. The spectator can only align with Summer, if he/she makes a conscious effort to do so. For example, one may consciously align with Summer as she does not gain a voice, however if we only view the film through the subconscious male gaze, the spectator may not align with Summer, as the audience cannot hear her perspective.
One may adapt to a negotiated reading of the film; if the spectator is not white, male or straight. Although the film is portrayed through Tom's perspective, if the spectator is not a white, straight male he/she may not feel allegiance towards Tom, disregarding the fact the film is told through his perspective. This may mean that the spectator is more inclined to view the film through alternate perspectives, such as Summer's. Therefore resulting in a negotiated reading as this would not have been the director's necessary intention.
When the female character in film becomes the dominant, she is usually punished as a result of this, usually resulting in her life. In other words, when the male gaze is subverted and film is viewed through the eyes of the woman, she is usually punished in some way. It is therefore usually more difficult to align with this character as she has broken out of her conventional role. One may argue that this is not applicable to 500 Days of Summer as for one, it is not portrayed through Summer's perspective, and two, she is not punished. However, others may argue that Summer is punished through audience response and therefore as a result of this, Williams' theory of the dominant gaze does apply. Another alternative view could be that 500 Days of Summer subverts this theory and reverses it; because the film is told through Tom's perspective, he is punished. This could apply as we see throughout the film that Tom takes on the submissive more feminine role, whilst Summer adapts to the more masculine role. We see this through the scene in the pancake house, when Summer describes the two as Sid and Nancy, then corrects Tom for thinking that he is Sid, when actually she describes herself as Sid. Therefore if we see Tom as the female, the dominant gaze can apply to the film as he is punished towards the end of the film by not getting Summer and going through his torture of her engagement party. Moreover, another interpretation of Williams' theory on this film could be that Summer is actually punished at the end of the film as she ends up caught in a marriage, which she states at the beginning of the film that she does not want.
In conclusion, the film 500 Days of Summer seems to be a male dominated film, if the spectator takes on a preferred reading of the film, not making a conscious decision to view the film through the eyes of the female. We see aspects of voyeurism and the male gaze throughout the film, whilst it being portrayed by a male protagonist throughout. However, a spectator could also take on a negotiated reading of the film if he/she was to take a conscious decision to align with the female character(s) such as Summer. Overall, it depends on the spectator's allegiance and alignment with the characters and whether they adapt to a negotiated or preferred reading of the film.
Friday, 13 February 2015
"How far does a spectator's gender affect their viewing experience in contemporary cinema?"
One may argue that the film Black Swan by Darren Aronfsky, could be seen as a provocative film, however this is dependent on whether or not you view the film through theories such as Mulvey's male gaze. If one was to take on an oppositional gaze, they may view the film as intellectually demanding.
Freud's theories of psychoanalysis and the Oedipal Complex could apply to this film. Freud argued that the 'ID' controls and suppresses the animalistic desires and fantasies. However, if these desires take over, the said person faces insanity and therefore the ID is released. This could apply throughout the film, Black Swan, but most prominently through the lesbian sex scene with Nina, the protagonist herself and her ballet colleague Lily. However, we soon realise that this scene must have been a hallucination of Nina's as Lily denies this situation. This therefore could be a coherent example of the escape of the ID and the animalistic sexual desires. Another way that Freud's theory could apply to the film could be that the typical, innocent Nina is represented as the white swan, whilst her oppressed fantasies and desires (ID) are represented as the black swan. As the film develops, we see aspects of the black swan take over Nina's innocence, this could therefore portray the escapism of the ID. As the black swan takes over Nina, she becomes more promiscuous and therefore loses her innocence.
We can also see aspects of Freud's Oedipal Complex within the film. The Oedipal Complex is the parental modelling and its lack of and effect. Nina is absent of a father figure and therefore throughout the film it could be argued that she is seeking for the fulfillment of this role. We can see this through the role of Thomas, Nina's choreographer. He is clearly older than her and directs her throughout her role as both a dancer and as a person. However, this father figure becomes corrupt when we see Thomas manipulate Nina sexually .
Another way that gender could affect the spectator's viewing experience is Mulvey's male gaze theory. Here, she describes that film is portrayed for and through the eyes of the male, satisfying the man's sexual fantasies and desires at the expense of the woman's. One way that the male gaze could be incorporated into the film Black Swan could be in the lesbian sex scene, satisfying a male fantasy. Another way could be through objectifications. The women in the film, are viewed as sexual objects and are portrayed and sexualised through close ups, whilst the male characters are not. This is clear on the train, when Nina is being winked and blown kisses at by the older man who sits opposite her. This man objectifies and sexualises Nina as merely a sex object. We also witness an aspect of voyeurism throughout the film. It is coherent that Nina has hallucinations throughout, whilst we view the film in her perspective, we see and witness these hallucinations too; making it more difficult to separate the reality from the fantasy. However, voyeurism is incorporated into the film, one being through the audience who watch Nina in the show, and the other being Thomas, who controls and constantly watches Nina. One could also argue that the aspect of mirrors also act as a voyeur; constantly following Nina; always being a reflection where ever she goes. These mirrors represent Nina's mental stability. (Broken mirrors, broken minds.)
Therefore, Lacan's mirror stage theory is very relevant to this film. The spectator gains a god-like perspective of film, creating an omni-potent and omni-present feel; making the camera go everywhere and see everything, without any restrictions. Like the camera, the mirrors in the film, go everywhere that Nina goes. Although these are not necessarily the same mirrors following her, Nina's reflection is constantly surrounding her, developing into her insanity. Lacan argued that who you identify with in film, is the expression f the suppressed subconscious and fantasies. Creating a distorted idea of who you are. The mirrors in Black Swan could be so significant to the narrative if one views the film as Lily being an extension of Nina. If Lily is not real, but just Nina's darker side/Black Swan whilst, Nina is momentarily the white innocent swan, the mirrors could be foreshadowing her mental state and this major factor. Constantly encouraging Nina to analysis and realise her mental stability. This could link to the ending of the film when Nina believes that she stabs Lily whilst she is dressed as the black swan. However, as the film develops we realise that it is not Lily who Nina stabs, but herself. This could portray the death of Nina's innocence, the black swan killing the white swan, who resembled Nina at the beginning of the film.
Freud's theories of psychoanalysis and the Oedipal Complex could apply to this film. Freud argued that the 'ID' controls and suppresses the animalistic desires and fantasies. However, if these desires take over, the said person faces insanity and therefore the ID is released. This could apply throughout the film, Black Swan, but most prominently through the lesbian sex scene with Nina, the protagonist herself and her ballet colleague Lily. However, we soon realise that this scene must have been a hallucination of Nina's as Lily denies this situation. This therefore could be a coherent example of the escape of the ID and the animalistic sexual desires. Another way that Freud's theory could apply to the film could be that the typical, innocent Nina is represented as the white swan, whilst her oppressed fantasies and desires (ID) are represented as the black swan. As the film develops, we see aspects of the black swan take over Nina's innocence, this could therefore portray the escapism of the ID. As the black swan takes over Nina, she becomes more promiscuous and therefore loses her innocence.
We can also see aspects of Freud's Oedipal Complex within the film. The Oedipal Complex is the parental modelling and its lack of and effect. Nina is absent of a father figure and therefore throughout the film it could be argued that she is seeking for the fulfillment of this role. We can see this through the role of Thomas, Nina's choreographer. He is clearly older than her and directs her throughout her role as both a dancer and as a person. However, this father figure becomes corrupt when we see Thomas manipulate Nina sexually .
Another way that gender could affect the spectator's viewing experience is Mulvey's male gaze theory. Here, she describes that film is portrayed for and through the eyes of the male, satisfying the man's sexual fantasies and desires at the expense of the woman's. One way that the male gaze could be incorporated into the film Black Swan could be in the lesbian sex scene, satisfying a male fantasy. Another way could be through objectifications. The women in the film, are viewed as sexual objects and are portrayed and sexualised through close ups, whilst the male characters are not. This is clear on the train, when Nina is being winked and blown kisses at by the older man who sits opposite her. This man objectifies and sexualises Nina as merely a sex object. We also witness an aspect of voyeurism throughout the film. It is coherent that Nina has hallucinations throughout, whilst we view the film in her perspective, we see and witness these hallucinations too; making it more difficult to separate the reality from the fantasy. However, voyeurism is incorporated into the film, one being through the audience who watch Nina in the show, and the other being Thomas, who controls and constantly watches Nina. One could also argue that the aspect of mirrors also act as a voyeur; constantly following Nina; always being a reflection where ever she goes. These mirrors represent Nina's mental stability. (Broken mirrors, broken minds.)
Therefore, Lacan's mirror stage theory is very relevant to this film. The spectator gains a god-like perspective of film, creating an omni-potent and omni-present feel; making the camera go everywhere and see everything, without any restrictions. Like the camera, the mirrors in the film, go everywhere that Nina goes. Although these are not necessarily the same mirrors following her, Nina's reflection is constantly surrounding her, developing into her insanity. Lacan argued that who you identify with in film, is the expression f the suppressed subconscious and fantasies. Creating a distorted idea of who you are. The mirrors in Black Swan could be so significant to the narrative if one views the film as Lily being an extension of Nina. If Lily is not real, but just Nina's darker side/Black Swan whilst, Nina is momentarily the white innocent swan, the mirrors could be foreshadowing her mental state and this major factor. Constantly encouraging Nina to analysis and realise her mental stability. This could link to the ending of the film when Nina believes that she stabs Lily whilst she is dressed as the black swan. However, as the film develops we realise that it is not Lily who Nina stabs, but herself. This could portray the death of Nina's innocence, the black swan killing the white swan, who resembled Nina at the beginning of the film.
Friday, 6 February 2015
Wednesday, 4 February 2015
Black gaze -> marginalised groups and a sense of community / belonging / brotherhood -> Django does not give us a sense of brotherhood. The black gaze is not always about the ethnicity of the characters. It accepts that white culture is dominant, and a history of subordinating the other cultures. La Haine has the black gaze.
Tuesday, 3 February 2015
500 Days of Summer
Submissive Gaze (aligning with other people):
In my opinion, it is difficult for the spectator t align with any other character but Tom, excluding their gender and extra textual reasons. The spectator will mainly and most likely align with Tom as the film is told through his perspective throughout. We are also informed from the very beginning that the relationship ends with Tom being hurt, therefore the spectator is most likely going to view Summer negatively since being told this factor. As we know that Tom's feelings are the ones that are hurt, we are more likely to align and sympathise with this character.
The only point in the film where we begin to witness Summer's side of the story, her dialog is blocked out by the narrator speaking over the top of what she is saying. This therefore results in the spectator being less likely to align with Summer even more so as we do not relate what she is opening up about, as the audience cannot hear this.
Dominant Gaze (Women must suffer if they become the active gaze):
This film is told through the male's perspective only (Tom), therefore we are forced to align with this character. We do not see the narrative through Summer's perspective, therefore we do not see if she suffers. Instead, this theory is reversed, Tom is the dominant, active gaze and suffers as a result of this; through the torture of their break up.
Male Gaze:
One way that the male gaze is portrayed in this film is in the ikea scene. We see Tom and Summer acting out as a married, almost traditional 1950s couple. Where Summer is the housewife and Tom is served. This incorporated the traditional, patriarchal values of the male gaze into the film.
Another key aspect of the film that incorporates the male gaze is the dancing/victory scene. This scene is the mass celebration of Tom sleeping with Summer. As this is portrayed through the male's perspective and seen as a goal post, this coherently incorporates the male gaze. The scene also heavily induces masculine aspects of mise en scene. For example, at the beginning of the scene we see Tom walking past a water fountain which explodes; creating phallic imagery. We also see him hit a ball with a baseball bat which could also symbolise phallic imagery and the fact that sleeping wit Summer is seen almost as a sports achievement. Although it could be argued that the dancers are dressed in blue as this is the colour of Summer's eyes, one may believe this also incorporates the male gaze. In terms of colour psychology, the colour blue is deemed as masculine.
In my opinion, it is difficult for the spectator t align with any other character but Tom, excluding their gender and extra textual reasons. The spectator will mainly and most likely align with Tom as the film is told through his perspective throughout. We are also informed from the very beginning that the relationship ends with Tom being hurt, therefore the spectator is most likely going to view Summer negatively since being told this factor. As we know that Tom's feelings are the ones that are hurt, we are more likely to align and sympathise with this character.
The only point in the film where we begin to witness Summer's side of the story, her dialog is blocked out by the narrator speaking over the top of what she is saying. This therefore results in the spectator being less likely to align with Summer even more so as we do not relate what she is opening up about, as the audience cannot hear this.
Dominant Gaze (Women must suffer if they become the active gaze):
This film is told through the male's perspective only (Tom), therefore we are forced to align with this character. We do not see the narrative through Summer's perspective, therefore we do not see if she suffers. Instead, this theory is reversed, Tom is the dominant, active gaze and suffers as a result of this; through the torture of their break up.
Male Gaze:
One way that the male gaze is portrayed in this film is in the ikea scene. We see Tom and Summer acting out as a married, almost traditional 1950s couple. Where Summer is the housewife and Tom is served. This incorporated the traditional, patriarchal values of the male gaze into the film.
Another key aspect of the film that incorporates the male gaze is the dancing/victory scene. This scene is the mass celebration of Tom sleeping with Summer. As this is portrayed through the male's perspective and seen as a goal post, this coherently incorporates the male gaze. The scene also heavily induces masculine aspects of mise en scene. For example, at the beginning of the scene we see Tom walking past a water fountain which explodes; creating phallic imagery. We also see him hit a ball with a baseball bat which could also symbolise phallic imagery and the fact that sleeping wit Summer is seen almost as a sports achievement. Although it could be argued that the dancers are dressed in blue as this is the colour of Summer's eyes, one may believe this also incorporates the male gaze. In terms of colour psychology, the colour blue is deemed as masculine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)