Final

 

 

 

A film can be indicative of human interactions and the events that occur within society; a series of what ifs or why nots. With that being said Holy Motors can be interpreted as the director and writer Leos Carax fantasy on the progression of society and how humans partake in socially aware roles. Actors, athletes, government officials exist in the public eye. How they are often portrayed is dictated by the media, more often than not it is all just an act. I don’t see this film as an accumulation of events of spectacle but a commentary on the relationship society often has with spectacle and those who initiate it, and how it affects the real lives of those who perform. If Holy Motors is a film about a man who is an actor performing different episodes that are shown to an intermediary audience within the film, it would mean the viewers enjoy acts of violence, death, music, sex, poverty, and fatherhood. How this film is constructed is a mind boggling endeavor, a cinematic feat. Holy Motors is an image of what fascinates society.

 

As Mr. Oscar is dressed as Merde eating a plate of Japanese cuisine he peers at a live stream image of the city of Paris, he then asks Celine his driver, “No appointments in the forests this week?” to which she responds, “Not this week Mr. Oscar.” Mr. Oscar solemnly peers downward stating, “Too bad, I miss the forests”. This exchange of dialogue between Mr. Oscar and Celine gives Mr. Oscar a normal human desire, to be in nature away from the people and the busy city. Although we know nothing about what happens in the forests, after all it is still an appointment, what we are witnessing is possibly a yearning for solitude by the performer or him wishing he had more control over his performances. In Guy Debord’s “Society of Spectacle” he states the “The individual who in the service of the spectacle is placed in stardom's spotlight is in fact the opposite of an individual, and as clearly the enemy of the individual in himself as of the individual in others. In entering the spectacle as a model to be identified with, he renounces all autonomy in order himself to identify with the general law of obedience to the course of things (Debord, 17).” Debord’s claim that performers are actually the opposite of an individual seem to coincide with the character of Mr. Oscar, he’s not asking when he is going to see his mother again, he’s asking when their will be another appointment he enjoys more than city appointments. If we compare Mr. Oscar to Tom Cruise it begins to make sense that performences set the tone for how art often imitates and influences real life behavior in society.  Why are we so fascinated by such vulgar emotional scenes? As Debord states “So long as the realm of necessity remains a social dream, dreaming will remain a social necessity. The spectacle is the bad dream of modern society in chains, expressing nothing more than its wish for sleep. The spectacle is the guardian of that sleep.” Society seems to be conditioned to accept spectacle as the rightful norm. Unlike films Tom Cruise performs in, Lavant as Mr. Oscar brings to light the complexity of the illusion of spectacle in film and why none of it really matters, it’s all just an act.

 

“For one to whom the real world becomes real images, mere images are transformed into real beings ­­tangible figments which are the efficient motor of trancelike behavior. Since the spectacle's job is to cause a world that is no longer directly perceptible to be seen via different specialized mediations, it is inevitable that it should elevate the human sense of sight to the special place once occupied by touch… (Debord, 7). 

 

A top model (Eva Mendes) stands posed for a magazine spread in a cemetery. Merde parades violently through the cemetery, eats flowers off tombstones (which read www.vistme.com), steals a cigarette, bites a photographer’s fingers off and then carries the model to his underground lair. This scene is a spectacle not because of the grotesque bloody arm pit lick, but because of how the model interacts with Merde. The spectacle of a beautiful model being abducted while the public gawks alludes to how corrupt modern society can be. It becomes a passive consumption of spectacle rather than active participation in life.  The model is a critique of American beauty standards. Eva Mende’s real life persona mingles with the models character she is playing. She’s thin and bored standing there as she lethargically falls onto Merde’s shoulders. This scene is commenting on the agenda of American beauty standards and how incredibly objectifying they really are and possibly a notion to change them. Mendes never seems uncomfortable with Merde, she accepts of his alterations, he challenges our concept of beauty by covering most of Mendes sexualized body in Islamic style balaclava exposing only her eyes. This expression relates to the saying which is mentioned in the film “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”.  Merde has changed the model from a sexualized, bored-to-death figure into a loving mother as he extends his naked body onto her lap. The scene ends with her singing softly to him as he continues to sleep.

 

Birth Mark- “What makes you carry on Oscar?”

Oscar- “What made me start, the beauty of the act.”

Birth Mark- “The beauty? They say it’s in the eye, the eye of the beholder.”

Oscar- “And what if there’s no beholder?”

 

Does the existence of an audience justify the performance regardless of the absurdity of the act? If performers are the opposite of an individual how do they carry on?  Holy Motors utilizes an implied intermediary audience to justify the acts being carried out by the protagonist. The director uses this technique to employ a film which bounces from one dramatic event to another to showcase what kind of content society expects out of films.

Week 4

What I gained from Baudrillard’s “Simulacra and Simulations” is that the human experience has been reduced to a series of symbols (simulations) through media as a result of capitalism. New needs, desires, and icons are created so that someone might profit from it. As time moves forward, new symbols are forged from reappropriation and rehashing of old symbols. New simulations emerge as past simulations are simulated. Motifs and certain visual cues or narrative structures become ingrained into pop culture to the point where they can be inderectly referenced or built upon indirectly, without an explanation provided for the consumer. This creates an alienation between individuals within society and forces members of the society to believe that these simulations are tangible goals that they are able to achieve rather than purely synthetic virtual versions that only have their basis in social interaction many iterations ago. This cycle continues and society becomes less attached to reality (meaning human connection and emotion) over time and the only reality left becomes the image which is purely a simulation of past truths which preceeded mass media (which I believeaccelerated with the spread of television as a fixture in homes around the world, but I guess the true origin would be the printing press).

“Holy Motors” is a film that relates to Baudrillard’s concept of Simulation. The film tracks an actor, Oscar, through many different scenarios, though it is never clear if there is actually a camera crew filming him. He is a part of many different genre oriented shorts or skits. He drifts through scenarios, getting harmed, killing versions of himself, and taking off/re-applying makeup and prosthetics over and over. He is a beggar, a monster, an upset father, a gangster, a dying man, an assassin, etc.  The film explicitly breaks into the territory of metacinema when the actor is riding in his limo and is confronted with a producer character. the producer questions him about why he thinks Oscar might be growing too old to be doing this anymore. Oscar says that he doesn’t feel the magic in motion pictures anymore, that cameras have gotten smaller and that the medium have lost something because of it. But he continues to do what he does because he loves to act. His comments about cameras seem funny or ironic because we never see a video camera during the film. “Holy Motors” never “feels” novel in that it never has a direct point where it feels like it’s simulations and rapid abandonment of different genres is forced. The movie ebbs and flows seemlessly through simulations. Oscar professes that he loves to act and that’s why he continues to do so in a manner which gives the impression of feeling infinite. I get the feeling that Leos Carax (the director) feels the same way about film making. The style and content of the film feel like a series of cliche rehashes of overused film styles. Yet the fearless quickness with which genres are left behind makes the film fun and wild. You can feel a love of cinema puring through the screen. 

Week 3

“Symbiopsychotaxiplasm” and “I am Curious (Yellow)” came out around the same time and both explore similiar themes in their exploration of metacinema. They are both pretty direct in their presentation of being films about the creation of a film, though they differ in the techniques used to convey the underlying philosophy. Because of difference in techniques, the emotional and philosophical response becomes different for the viewer.

In “I am Curious (Yellow),” the film is about a director’s (Vilgot’s) relationship with the lead actress (Lena) in his film and Lena’s relationship with Bill, an actor portraying a salesman. The film has a very autobiographical feel to it and the plot of the film is disrupted with documentary footage of Lena on the street asking the public difficult questions obout politics and ethics, as well as footage featuring Martin Luther King, Jr. in an actual interview that was conducted by Vilgot Sjöman. The film purposely blurs which parts of the line are documentary and which parts are staged. Some parts seem like part of the “real world” of the film only to have the shot pull back and reveal the Vilgot and a crew filming the scene. The only truly honest reactions that are illicited from subjects are the answers provided during the “person on the street” interviews. Even those feel effected by the presense of a camera though, particularly the scenes in which people are asked about Francisco Franco, the dictator of Spain at the time. It seems as though they are afraid to answer honestly when their reactions will be made public through distribution of the film. At the heart of “I am Curious” is a statement about the effect film making has on relationships and politics. How the act of making a film influences one’s behaviour and dictates one’s actions.

“Symbiopsychotaxiplasm” is also about the effect making a film has on those involved, but is a more direct and experimental approach to that basic idea. In the film, director William Greaves hires a cast and crew to shoot some footage for a film he is making. He then hires a crew to document the making of the film and a thirrd crew to document everything that’s happening including the other two crews and the public in Central Park. William takes on a character as stupid and confused director. The project becomes unhinged as the crews begin to get fed up with William’s behavior on set, almost to the point of mutiny. Even during the scene where the crew is apparently plotting a mutiny, it’s not clear wether this is a legitamit meeting or if Greaves put them up to this, which is something one of the crew members references to the camera. “Symbiopsychotaxiplasm” does a great job at capturing seemingly authentic conversations and interactions from the participants of the film. With so many cameras rolling, it seems like those involved sometimes forget that the camera is there.

While both films comment on the effect that filmmaking has on all those involved, “I am Curious (Yellow)” does so through a more nuanced and poetic script while “Symbiopsychotaxiplasm” goes for an experimental approach.

Week 2

“Man Bites Dog,” “The Eternal Frame” and the “White Bear” episode of Black Mirror deal with excitement and passivity in the face of terrible violent acts.

“The Eternal Frame” documents a recreation of the JFK shooting. The crew is meticulous in recreating the events as realistically as possible. While one might expect the audience that gathers to watch the recreation to be upset or sad, it turns out they are pretty excited about watching the whole thing go down. The JFK assassination was the first true mass media spectale. It happened just as televisions had become a staple in American homes and prior to the assassination, there was never a film event as widespread. The film simulatneously deconstructs and celebrates the media’s appropriation of the assassination by putting on a huge spectacle for those around the neighborhood while at the same time exposing their obsession with the public death of a world leader.

“Man Bites Dog” is the most visceral film of the bunch, featuring the crew as characters that are part of the narrative. The film feigns a doumentary structure focusing on a serial killer, Ben, as he wanders around harming and murdering peope seemingly at random. As the film progresses, so does the physical involvement of the crew in regards to the violent acts. Their attitude towards the acts of violence is torubling from the beginning, they don’t stop Ben from murdering people or help the victims. The turning point in the film is when the crew help Ben murder a child. A few scenes later, the take turns raping a woman while cheering each other on. The gang rape scene is the most poignant and hard to swallow. Later, Ben murders a woman at a party, but instead of the other party-goers trying to stop him or calling the police, they just kind of act like it’s normal and go on with the party. That scene takes the film into surreal territory (although I guess the entire premise is a bit unbelievable from the beginning). Eventually the crew and the subject meet their demise as they are gunned down in the end.

Black Mirror consistently does a great job of taking the way media and technology is increasingly influences social behoavior and pushing it to a terrifying point. The plot of episode “White Bear” doesn’t disappoint. The episode begins seeming like an action thriller. A woman, Victoria, wakes up with amnesia and when she goes out into the world, she is confronted by violent masked characters while spectators watch on, all holding out their cameras to record the events. Victoria soon learns about a signal that is being transmitted that causes most of society to become useless voyeurs while the unaffected either choose a path of violence or evade the violent ones. Towards the end of the episode, Victoria finds out that the whole plot was a setup and she is actually a part of a punishment program where she relives the same trauma daily. The interesting part of the punishment program to me is that the spectators/audience endorse this program and routinely attend these daily events willingly, seeming to enjoy watching Victoria go through the same struggle every day.

All three pieces from this week dealt with the public’s fascination with violence. The approaches to conveying this obsession were a sign of the times in each case. “The Eternal Frame” is modernist in its approach; “Man Bites Dog” is postmodern; “White Bear” is contemporary.

Normally Odd Characters

Often times for a film to be seen or felt as similar to another film, the two will share major thematic elements, whether that be plot points, story structure, character developments, or even more broadly, genre. Having these core similarities help draw out more minor connections that could be missed otherwise. Yet somehow, despite Holy Motors and Man Bites Dog sharing very little in the characteristics mentioned, the two films succeed in being very similar to each other.

The plot lines for Holy Motors and Man Bites Dog are fairly removed from each other, the former being a mockumentary about a serial killer and the latter being a collection of performances being acted out by a man whose life seems to have been consumed by them. While the plot of these films vary quite a bit, the structure that the two are told in are very similar. In both films the audience is thrown into the life of a character they know nothing about but are quickly given looks into their bizarre lives. In Man Bites Dog, a unsuspecting man, Ben, stands riding on a train who then strangles a woman to death within the first minute of the film. The same man is then sitting next to a river, explaining how he is disposing of the body in detail to the camera.

Similarly in Holy Motors, the first introduction we have to Mr Oscar is that he is an apparently rich banker walking towards a stretch limosine, escorted by guards. Once he enters the limo, it is quickly revealed that he is in a costume and continues to change into a different costume and persona, and does so regularly throughout the film. Despite not knowing this trait initially for either character, and not having any sort of exposition as to why the characters are doing what they are, both are clearly laid out and have there far from ordinary lives establish.




The parallels between Ben and Mr. Oscar continue on throughout both films. Both are shown as very established and comfortable in performing the duties that they are required in doing. Neither show and sort of discomfort in their work and complete in as through it is something that they have been doing their entire lives, and also as something that is not at all out of the ordinary. Ben effortlessly kills people throughout the entire film while casually explaining his process to the camera as he does so. Mr. Oscar weaves through different characters both visually and emotionally, showing no attachment to a previous character within an scene through most of the film.

In addition to the character introductions and styles being structurally similar, both films overall structure are very similar in presentation. In both a world is presented that is far from ordinary for most viewers. While in the case of Holy Motors this world is changing dramatically from scene to scene, it still maintains a feeling of strage-ness. Despite having these abnormal tasks and events happening, the supporting characters around the main character never do anything to impede on the events taking place and actually take part in promoting them. In Holy Motors the limo driver is the vehicle for the mans oddities(no pun intended); she drives him to and from his "appointments" and also provides him with briefings on what is to be done at said appointments. The same can be said for the camera crew in Man Bites Dog. They are not only documenting what the serial killer is doing, but are eventually taking part in and assisting in his actions. While the influence of the camera crew on the events created by the main character are far greater towards the end of the film than that of the limo driver, they both carry essentially the same responsibility within the contexts of their story.

Memories - CS

All the Memories in the World is a very well put together film. Clips from hundreds of films with similar content are strung together to illustrate the narrative. It really makes one think about how much of our memories are that of film fiction. What is supposed to be entertainment sticks in our mind better than actual life events. We have to remember which memories are real and which occurred on screen. Sometimes that is difficult. Your brain can blur the real and the fiction together into a mess that all become life experiences.

This was online class I've taken that I have enjoyed the most. The video chats made this feel more like a class rather than just learning from an anonymous person on a computer. I enjoyed the films and it made me think about all the different ways metacinema can be used and the various purposed it has. I wish I would've had time to truly make the meta film I planned on making for this class, but now I'm inspired to make metacinematic work of my own.

Community, Society, and the Meta

              Community has never been a television show that has reached mass-appeal. When it was on NBC, it always seemed on the verge of being canceled. It has been said that the only thing that kept it on that network was a relatively small but vocal fan-base, who petitioned during every off season to bring Community back. How can a show with such vocal fans still stay out of the mainstream? This could partially be because the show would like to do “genre episodes.” Changing the cinematic style each week as an homage to a different film genre (zombie horror, western, documentary, to name a few). A new viewer tuning in for the first time might be confused and turned off by one of these “strange” episodes. Creating episodes to be in the style of different film genres is evidence that the show is self-aware on some level. It is using television to make a comment on film or the filmmaking process, aka metacinematic. But, even beyond the show’s high-concept, genre episodes, the more grounded episodes, centered around Greendale Community College, still use the ideas of metacinema to be humorous. Despite the low ratings, Community still had five seasons on a major broadcast network. This leads me to believe that there was a societal void for metatelevison because people were ready for shows that referenced an aspect of filmmaking or television.

                Before I get ahead of myself, it is worth noting the shows Community shared a programming block in its heyday: The Office and Parks and Recreation (both shows shot in a psudo-documentary style) and 30 Rock (a show about making a fictional television show). It appears that all the shows in this two-hour block reference film or television in some way, so Community was in good company. But why program this sudden influx of self-referential shows? For the answer we have to look at society. Vito Acconci writes in the 1990s “The TV consumer practices the roll of the TV producer. The means is the field of home-made video.” Back then home-made video was record on a VHS tape with a camcorder, but by 2009, when Community began its run, the home video creation and sharing had exploded in popularity. With the creation of YouTube and more affordable video equipment and editing software, average people started to create and share content. They had truly shifted from consumers of programming to the producers. Now that more people were familiar with how filmmaking works, they were ready for content that mirrors (or parodies) their experiences. Community functions on this theory.

                How exactly does Community function as metatelevision? To answer this, we will explore two episodes: “Messianic Myths and Ancient Peoples” from season two and “Emotional Consequences of Broadcast Television” from season six. Both of these episodes heavily use meta to drive the plot of the episode or discuss the fate of the show.

                “Messianic Myths and Ancient Peoples” is about Abed, a film student, creating film about the life of Jesus. Because the story has been told to death, he claims that his film is the Jesus movie for the post-postmodern world. The idea is the filmmaker is Jesus and the cameras are God. 

 Abed is both the filmmaker and the star simultaneously. Abed calls it “Filmmaking beyond film.  A Meta film. My Masterpiece.” During shooting there seems to be specific scenes set up but if they become interrupted Abed goes with it. This process blurs the line between reality and the film which captivates the entire school.

Two students gossip: “I heard the film is the same backwards and forwards.” “I heard the scenes are the deleted scenes and the deleted scenes are the scenes.” These two quotes allude to the extra levels of thought that is involved with metacinema. The concepts of films played backwards or deleted scenes originated as film terms, and therefore, they connect the film back to the world of film at a fundamental level. Abed acts as though his film is omnipresent because the camera represents God. He is completely into his film until he sees a rough cut of it. In that moment he realizes that his film is a “self-indulgent, adolescent mess.” The phrase “self-indulgent” is often used to describe metacinema. Filmmakers making films about filmmakers making films seems to be the ultimate act of self-indulgency. Abed admits his film is film is crap but there was so much hype behind it that he had no choice but to finish it.

Shirley, who overheard Abed praying, took in on herself to destroy the hard drives with the footage to save Abed’s film career. His film then becomes one of the “great” lost films. Its legend is more powerful than the film ever would be.

“Emotional Consequences of Broadcast Television” is the final episode of season six, which is possibly the final episode of Community. During this episode the characters “pitch” their ideas for “season seven” (playing into Abed’s habit of calling their years at Greendale seasons). 

 Abed begins with explaining their formula, which is acted out by the characters in a cutaway. The dialogue explains generically what the characters would say in one of their normal conversations and is quite accurate.  

After this, the other characters begin to pitch what they think would be the perfect season seven. Abed listens to each pitch but still thinks the seventh season is unlikely. He questions what show peaks after season six and is disappointed that his “show” has been hemorrhaging “characters” every year. (This is true because three of the original principal cast had left the show by this point.) 

Every line of dialogue that Abed says can be taken as direct commentary about the show Community. Abed works as a medium who the show’s creator, Dan Harmon, speaks directly to the audience though. The show is speaking for itself while not quite acknowledging that it is doing so. This episode works as metatelivision because it comments on how comments on how TV networks stifle creative control and use up a show to then toss it out. This was exactly the fate of Community. “Emotional Consequences of Broadcast Television” brings the meta of the show so close to the surface that is nearly inverts itself and directly addresses the audience, but it stays true to its “formula” and stays meta.

Community’s small and loyal fan-base are exactly who this show is for. They are the section of society that can relate enough to its meta humor to not dismiss it. While the mainstream television audience might not be able to grasp all the concepts that the show puts forth, it will be noted as one of the great “cult” TV shows.