Identities in Contemporary European Cinema

This morning we began class by watching a documentary that is a series of interviews. In my opinion, the comments of these incredibly knowledgeable film makers do an excellent job speaking to the film "Battle of Algiers" saying that it works as a movie, as politics, and affects everyone that sees it in a certain way. They describe what a film should be, saying that this film hits the bulls eye, and that it transcends the on screen action and auditory accompaniment offers a mood that "alters" the viewer.  Beyond praise for the movie however, this documentary also does a good job of sorting summing up everything that we've talked about this semester. Having been absorbed in this course, I think that the things that the film makers were saying were even more understandable. I think I have a much great appreciation for film than I did... now being able to analyze the film in order to sort of see into the heart and soul of the film maker.  (especially in political films)

We watched a film today about the development of film in Europe.  I was surprised by the film's beginning as Alfred Hitchcock's film was rejected because it seemed to regard film as an art, which "arty" was an insult in Britain. Few films were profitable in a very small market. But the British almost invented the cinema and led the industry for a few years... in 1913 interest began to fade and audience began to viewfilms as dull. "The one thing that survives in adepression is entertainment..." American stars were more acceptable to the British than the British actors were. English literature was an asset to film .. even when Britain did make a film of high quality... no one saw it. London didn't like the idea of investing in the industry. The question of politics and power tied to film... america wouldn't take britains films. George Pearson was one of the few people who regarded film making as an art.

Professor Antle surprised me today as she told me that my review of "Salut Cousin" was the best review I have written so far. I think I gained a lot of insight from her compliment as to the necessity for the insertion of personal opinion. I learned from our discussion today that there is also a lot of value in offering some credit to a film even when it is not to your liking. I still don't care a whole lot for the film itself, but I think it's worth something when a film touches on a subject or societal issue and promotes discussion.

We just started discussing how Maymester is more intense than a regular semester. But I think there's a lot of value in that. Dispite the fact that it is incredibly intense, or maybe because of it... I feel like i have been more committed to this course than during the regular semester, and consequently have learned much more. I think I'm going to miss my maymester friends. : )

Today in class we discussed European Identities. At this point, I'm not sure it's possible to make a blanket statement to characterize all of these identities, but this in itself is a statement. European Identities are impossible to box in. They range from the shallow to the deep, from the emotionally troubled to the carefree. Film is a method of creating a sort of commentary on life and humanity, and so the identities of European cinema are just as ambiguous and broadly ranged as the identities of any men, or the people in this room.

Film is a very powerful medium to portray these identities because due to its time constraints, it strips "life" of action that is irrelevant to characterization or plot propulsion. Although film can be very complex, it scales life down into a model that we can hold in our hands and examine. And after coming to conclusions... we take the conclusions we make and apply them to our own lives and our dealing with others. In a way, film allows for self examination in a way that a mirror cannot, as it invites us to relate to onscreen characters, comparing and contrasting them with our own identities and ideals. In this way, it perhaps makes us more human by improving our understanding of ourselves, as well as our understanding of others.

A theme that I have seen emerge from these European films is an effort to create a character as an individual rather than a European or a nation.

play on preconceptions (Paris Je T'aime)

ADD ONE OR TWO EXAMPLES. Make it more "european"- more in touch with the arts... more able to love... more tied to culture...

"Sex is Comedy" opens with slow methodical string music that brightens along with the screen as it adopts a picked guitar and a female voice. As the day emerges from the wee hours of the morning the brightness increases to reveal a tech crew setting up for a film, which also sets the stage for this story. But his construction of an artistic and beautiful mood is quickly destroyed as the film deconstructs the master of illusion that a viewer is exposed to as a final product. This film, although it presents the making of art, is everything but beautiful.


The depiction of setting up a shot within a shot causes the viewer to consider the action behind what he sees on screen. What appears natural is often unnatural, as spoken by the male actor on the beach to the director. Also ironic is the difference between the actual weather and what is being filmed. The setting is actually cold and rainy but is meant to appear warm and sunny. This shows film to be an art form that must operate within many constraints.

The construction of a kiss acts as the main source of irony within the film. The kiss is usually a climactic moment of subjectivity for the viewer, but this undercover revelation destroys that notion with awkward discomfort. This aspect of the film turns the entertained into a skeptic of truth in a character.

As viewers, we do not consider the action behind the kiss or the minds controlling or shaping the image, we simply take it to be a kiss. In this film, Breillat is deconstructing the ability of the viewer to simply take in what they see at face value as she replaces that ability with the need to examine it's creation. The title of the film reveals its irony: what we see as passion is often awkward and force.

This Film, by Director Alain Brigand, consists of 11 eleven minute shorts compiled in response to the events of September 11, 2002. Ironically, the first clip is not what one would expect from the title, which implies a commemorative film that would sympathize with the American people and the American victims of the tragedy. It opens in an Arabic setting, created with sands and costume. Continuing to contradict the viewer's initial notion, the film manages to create a stance between it's 11 film makers that is entirely neutral towards America in regards to the tragedy.