photographs taken, or rather, created, by yours truly. haha.
teddy (click here to download powerpoint file.)
On Audience, Actor, and Star. ||| On Space, Time, and Motion in Film. February 20, 2007
In Stanley Cavell’s essay “Audience, Actor, and Star,” some differences between film and theater are discussed. Cavell stated that theater is obviously performed live while film is taped or recorded. The performers in theater are really present, while in film, the audience does not actually see the performers live. In theater, the performer should avoid committing mistakes since the performance is done live. On the other hand, in film, actors have the advantage of committing mistakes. In theater, the performer is more of a character. Then in film, the performer is more of an actor.
A film star usually portrays almost the same roles among his or her movies. He or she has already created an identity, which the audience expects to see every time they watch a movie that this particular star is in. For example, Brad Pitt is known on having the ‘leading man’ role in most of his films. In Babel, however, he portrayed a role which I think is somehow off his usual role. The role he portrayed in Babel required too much from him than his other movies. Nonetheless, Brad Pitt still went well with his role in Babel.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
According to Alexander Sesonske, films occupy a different space as to the ‘natural space.’ The space that movies occupy is dubbed in Sesonske’s essay as ‘cinema space.’ The film Babel is both visually and audibly good. Its fine cinematography blends well with the audio aspect of the film. The background music comes in harmony with the scenes. And these two aspects, I say, make the viewers ‘feel’ the film.
Since films have this power on time, which, through editing, the past, present, and future in a movie could be drawn together, and the right order (past first, then present, then future) could not be the sequence in the film. The time in film can be played around. In the film Babel, there are actually three stories that actually happen simultaneously. And these three stories are connected to each other. So the filmmaker played with the three stories in the film, as regards to time and progression.
Woman as Image, Man as Bearer of the Look – Laura Mulvey February 6, 2007
- – -
According to Laura Mulvey, like many other authors or individuals in general believe, there exists a sexual imbalance in this world. Of course, it is evident. Men are believed, viewed to and most of the time, they really play the major role(s) in almost everything in this world. And women, most of the time since once upon a time, play the minor roles. Women have been considered the ‘second sex.’
Most films, of course, exhibit reality. Or at least, they show what is closest to reality. Therefore, this gender inequality or sexual imbalance is as well portrayed in most films, except those that uplift the female gender.
Mulvey said that women in films hold two roles as performers: first, to be viewed by the co-performer (male) and second, by the male audience.
In the movie In The Mood for Love, particular body parts of the woman (Maggie Cheung) is always being focused. These body parts are those that interest men most. The actress, like how Mulvey sees it, is being viewed by different kinds of viewers. First is the co-performer (Tony Leung Chiu-Wai). Secondly, the “audience.” The audience comprise both the movie viewers themselves and as well those who work behind the camera, like the director, set crew, etc.
Also, the female viewers, on the other hand, may view the actress as how the male viewers see her, or have a view of her in another way.
A female audience may either put herself in the position of a “male viewer” or in the position of the “female actress” as an image. A female audience may as well put herself into both positions, depending on the situation.
For example, there are scenes in the film that she could relate to. Perhaps, times like these, she would rather be in the position of the “actress”. She could easily put herself into the “image” since she somehow knows how it feels like to be in the shoes of the actress.
But, during moments in the film where there is no complications at all, and there is no need for you to dwell upon the scenes (e.g. scene where a girl is walking) and all you could do as a viewer is to solely view what you see on screen, these are the times where you can transform into JUST a viewer, staring at the woman, at her body, her movements, etc.
Also, when a female viewer cannot relate at all to what the actress is doing or portraying, this could also be the time that a female viewer could transform into only a viewer, and become part of the male audience, who plays the “bearer of the look.”
Citizen Kane. January 29, 2007
Exterior of Xanadu Mansion.
In the beginning of the movie, the exterior of the Xanadu mansion of Kane is being shown. A ‘No Trespassing’ signboard comes into view, hanging on the fence, in gloomy lighting. It’s almost like a black screen due to its dark lighting and since it is in black and white. Slowly the camera travels upward, showing the huge gate, which on top of it, the letter ‘K’ stands. While the letter ‘K’ is being shown clearer on the left, on the upper right stands the mansion, in still the darkness of early dawn, in haze. In addition, the musical background is also strange, which adds up to the also creepy feeling acquired by the viewers.
Then the images slowly melt away.
Different imageries appear, which are still found on the exterior of the mansion. All these in darkness. The camera moves closer and closer to the mansion that still stands in darkness. The mansion appears closer. The camera moves toward the window until the frame of that window becomes the screen frame. There is light within the window. But all of a sudden, it turns off, while the movement of the camera stops as well. Background music ceases. The scene dissolves.
Snow Flakes.
Snow flakes come falling. A simple house appears in blur, in close-up, its roof covered with snow. Zoom out. There is a glass ball on a person’s palm. Inside the glass ball stands the simple house.
Mouth of perhaps Kane appears. He starts to talk in an old voice. Uttering the word ‘Rosebud.’ The camera retracts. Then a hand shows up (most probably Kane’s), holding the glass ball, then the ball just slides out if his hand.
Kane’s Room.
The base of Charles’ bed appears and the camera is in close-up. The silhouette of a nurse can be seen. The camera follows the movement of the hands of the nurse while she puts the arms on top of the stomach and pulls the bed sheet up over Kane’s head. Fade out. Total darkness.
Fade in.
News on the March.
Metallic music comes.
Dissecting ‘Antigong Agong’ Through Aristotle’s Point of View. January 16, 2007
In Aristotle’s Poetics, ‘tragedy’ is divided into six elements.
PLOT
I suppose the musical Antigong Agong has a well-organzized plot. For one, unity of the plot was sustained. Evidently, the plot progressed from beginning to end in accordance with a structured series of probable events, or probable improbable events.
The plot of Antigong Agong follows Freytag’s triangle.
Introduction. At the beginning of the show or of the performance, the characters were being introduced.
Rising Action. The is the part where the conflict regarding the dowry is brought up.
Climax. The part where Samsullah and his friends were on their way to Bundok Daghu, in search of the ‘antigong agong’, until the part where the flashback started.
Falling Action. The part where they’ve already uncovered the history of their land (the massacre that took place 100 years ago).
Resolution. Realizations were revealed. Also, this is the part where Samsullah received the scholarship and the dowry problem has already been worked out.
CHARACTER
In Aristotle’s Poetics, he mentioned four points. First is that the so-called hero should be good or ought to be portrayed as good. In Antigong Agong, Samsullah shows this kind of character. Next, the actors must be appropriate enough for their characters. In the musical, the characters in the story are Tausugs then it is just proper that they get Tausug actors as well to portray for the characters. Third, actors should appear to be real. In Antigong Agong, I’ll give credits to the actors for making the musical close-to-reality. They should appear real since they could easily relate to the story and to their lines since they’re as well Tausugs. Lastly, the performers should be consistent all throughout the show. And even if they become inconsistent, then they should be inconsistent all throughout the show, which Aristotle calls ‘consistently inconsistent.’ The actors in Antigong Agong were acceptably consistent with their roles.
DICTION
Since the performers were Tausugs in reality, they would surely seem realistic when they talk. But even if they speak somehow differently compared to most of the audience, however, the audience still did not have a hard time following the lines of the actors and actresses.
THOUGHT
Perhaps what the playwright wanted the audience to think about or dwell on after every line of the whole play, were somehow what the audience really thought of. Since the play isn’t the so abstract, the audience understood the lines and as well interpreted or figured out the right way.
SPECTACLE
The stage set or design, props, and costumes of the actors or actresses went well among each of the three elements. Or let’s put it this way, the three elements were all in harmony among each of them.
M ELODY
Different sorts of instruments were used in the play. From native to the contemporary ones. Also, the songs were notable; catchy and easy to comprehend. All in all, the music, songs, effects were enough to make the story more interesting. Also, the ‘Melody’ played a role in making the audience understand more the story.
we found an ‘Antigong Agong’ January 15, 2007
Last December 6, we watched the musicale entitled Antigong Agong. The story is written by Arnel Mardoqiou, who is as well the director of the play. Its musical director is Davao’s very own, Popong Landero.
The musical play is a centennial tribute to the Bundok Dahu (Bud Dahu) massacre in Jolo, Sulu 100 years ago. The story of the musicale is about a group of Tausug youths who goes through a rough time after they have graduated from college. Samsullah or Sam, who plays the central character, confronts his problem on how to come up with the amount of money, which the father of his fiancée (Amrayda) expects him to give as dowry, as imposed by the Muslim culture. His friends, Faidal, Fatima, and Nadzme express their sympathy to Sam and Amrayda as well. They encourage Samsullah to go and work with them abroad since they heard that there are higher-paying jobs waiting for them particularly in America.
Before Sam and his friends leave the town, Amrayda’s grandmother tells her that Samsullah could as well seek for the ‘antigong agong’ as substitute for the dowry. Amrayda stops Sam from leaving. Their supportive friends as well decide not to continue their journey overseas.
Their search for the ‘antigong agong’ starts, with the belief that it is going to be an easy quest. But they realize that it is not that simple to look for the’ antigong agong’. Along the way, they find out that their quest is not simply just about that ‘agong’, rather, they’re on their quest to uncovering the shocking history of their community, how Americans mistreated their ancestors and their land as a whole.
tuhog. two-hog. January 15, 2007
(on the left is my version of tuhog)
(on the right, ****)
*the actual film 
**the film within the film
tuhog*. we love this film, don’t we? hehe. and definitely, hayok sa laman** as well!
tuhog and hayok sa laman both show the sin of incest. but as a whole, the movie exhibits the cruelty that at times happen in our country’s film industry. putting in danger the names and even the lives of other people for money’s sake.
what i would really like to discuss in this blog entry is not the film itself, or even the film within it. rahter, i am interested in sharing my thoughts on the ‘theory of imitation’, then relating it to the tuhog and hayok sa laman.
it is evident that in ‘hayok sa laman’, a lot had been changed. still, the people responsible for making the movie, made public that it is based on a true story. when it should have been portrayed as a film full of drama, it ended up, intentionally, as a bold movie.
as discussed in class, should painters, poets, and other artists as such feel bad that they only ‘imitate’ an imitated piece? i agree that they do really just copy an already imitated piece, but maybe they should not actually feel bad about it if their intentions are genuine — for personal bliss or to make other people happy without stepping onto others’. but for those who make a piece of art and yet they endanger other people, these people are the ones who should feel bad when they imitate something that has already been imitated.
like in this film, some details were changed in ‘hayok sa laman’, because they believed that if they change the story into a more daring one, it would sell more and be snapped up.
for me, it’s really not an issue if you imitate something. even imitating something that has already been imitated is fine, as long as your intentions are pure. as long as it is for art’s sake.
besides, we naturally are born imitators.
****
(image source: http://www.cbcpworld.com/cinema/archives/2001/assets/tuhog.gif)
men innately imitate. January 15, 2007
“Imitation, then, is one instinct of our nature.”
-Aristotle
Precisely. Imagine how infants try to imitate the people close to them, their parents in particular. Uttering the ‘ma-ma’ and ‘pa-pa’. Following their parents or siblings do the ‘close-open’ hand/s or point a finger or clap their hands. This process of imitation of what they notice around them continues until they become old.
If Plato views imitation negatively, Aristotle thinks otherwise. For him, imitation is good and it is in imitation that we learn.
Children in particular slowly become part of the ‘real world’ once they have acquired the things they have to learn. And the only way they acquire these things is through learning from their parents, siblings, relatives, and other older people. In addition, one would know that a certain individual belongs to a particular culture because of the way he or she speaks, acts, thinks, etc. And how someone speaks, acts, and thinks are patterned through their upbringing or background. Most of the time, children tend to speak, act, and think alike with their parents. Probably because parents are supposedly the most influential individuals to a child. Even some grown-up children tend to idolize or look up to their parents.
But for me, it is not only in imitation that we acquire learning. There are times as well that we learn from our own discovery and ingenuity. That is when we try to be different, to have our own world, and still we could learn a lot from being independent from imitation.
