Marshall McLuhan- The Medium is the Massage

Considered one of the most controversial and original thinkers of our time, Marshall McLuhan is additionally regarded worldwide as the “father of communications and media studies” as well.  As he was witnessing the development of technology, he formulated observations that were intuitive and thought-provoking; thus concluding that as society’s values and norms tend to change because of the technology, and its then that we realize that there are indeed social implications of the medium.

The cleverness of the presentation of the context made it easy to follow and understand…(and it was a refreshingly condensed book as well.)  The art and style has a fresh and modern appeal, even though it was printed in 1967, and yet it has a quirkiness that’s rather humorous in a way.

So, overall McLuhan REALLY DID know what he was talking about.  The book is even more relevant to today than it was back in the day, making it more relatable now that the computer is become the ultimate gateway to the “global village”.

Federico Fellini

The three movies I chose to watch were, La Strada, 8 ½, and La Dolce Vita, all conceived by the brilliant and artistically driven, Italian director- Federico Fellini. 

Fellini, arguably considered one of Italy’s greatest directors, blended the art of personal expression with fantasy and dreams.  Fellini’s is able to tackle the issue of humanity’s struggle for identity and our reason for living. His surrealistic approach to filmmaking has reserved his place in film history; inspiring other directors to respectively cite from his acclaimed films. 

La Strada explores the soul’s eternal conflict between the heart and mind.  It a film full of visual imagery-- with the assistance of dramatic camera angles and beautifully composed shots.  We follow the “relationship” of a carnival strongman, Zampano and his assistant, Gelsomina.  Zampano is actually a pretty rotten person—constantly demoralizing and abusing her.  Her innocence and weak-mindedness is no match for his dominance and so she just puts up with it without question.  Fortunately, the films protagonist is a kind and gentle clown that sees Gemsomina’s situation and wants her to leave Zampano.  Through a series of pranks-- driven with an underlying malice by the clown to the strongman—leads us to the climax of the story, which ends in despair and tragedy. 

8 ½  is an autobiographical portrayal of Fellini’s personal life; through a visually stunning landscape of the subconscious. But it is also an indelible image that shatters any preconceived illusion of "typical" elements in a Fellini film.  The 8 ½  is a “symbol” for his artistic transition, in which the subtle forms and religious iconography of his earlier films have been replaced by specifically composed and exaggerated, hyperbolic imagery, which was to become his signature, “Felliniesque” style. This novel is an introspective journey about Guido Anselmi (Marcello Mastroianni), a successful film director who takes a holiday at an exclusive health spa in order to overcome a creative dry spell. But Guido appears to be narcissistic and self-indulgent, preferring to spend his time chatting with wealthy resort patrons and arranging trysts with his oversexed mistress, Carla, than actually spending the time to formulate ideas for his next film. He begins to lead a life of excess instead of undergoing physical (and psychological) cleansing and purification. And, unable to derive inspiration from his chaotic environment, he immerses himself in the distraction of childhood memories and indulgent fantasies.  Including conversing with an emotionally inaccessible father, and reciting the magic words to a hidden treasure.  In essence, Guido is searching for balance: between childhood traumas and idealism, the sensual and the intellectual, artistic integrity and commercial success. Inevitably, Guido is as much a reflection of Fellini as he is of ourselves: striving for greatness, only to achieve the ordinary and familiar... with episodes of momentary abstraction in between.

La Dolce Vita is a film that defined society as abrasive and legitimately through the creative psyche of Fellini.  The story is about a frustrate writer, who is reduced to tabloid journalism in order to make ends meet.  He spends each evening in “Via Veneto” (the venerable hotspot for people who want to be seen).  Vicariously awaiting the next scandal, party invitation, or even a sexual proposition.  Although his nights are spent with different women, in which there he experiences fleeting happiness, he is still consumed with self-doubt; unable to fully enjoy his success.  Then he finds himself caught up in a hubbub spectacle of a false sighting of the Virgin Mary.  Fellini takes advantage of the visual use of stairs as a way to not only allow the characters to transition from scenes, but to help us as the viewer transition as well.  Such as the decent to the prostitutes flooded basement apartment, the climb to the church tower, and the walk to the public fountain.  Lastly, it’s interesting that the film begins and ends with the same incident, where Marcello, unable to hear the cryptic message, returns to “his distraction” (perhaps still dreaming of attaining the “sweet life”).

Lolita

First and foremost, I have to state that this was contextually one of the more challenging stories that I’ve read in a long time.  Written by Vladimir Nabokov, the controversial subject matter was completely off-putting; yet, I found myself becoming intrigued in a way.  To be honest, if it wasn’t for the beautifully composed and well-written narrative, I would’ve said, “screw it” and disregard the novel altogether.  It’s actually rather difficult to place this novel in a specific genre, though; but I guess the best way to describe it would be a “psychological adult tragedy” in the form of a memoire.  And, rather than a typical “love story”, I would describe it as it being a “lust story”

“She was Lo, plain Lo, in the morning, standing four feet ten in one sock.  She was Lola in slacks, she was Dolly at school.  She was Dolores on the dotted line.  But in my arms she was always- Lolita.  Light of my life, fire of my loins.  My sin.  My soul.”   

This is the first and probably one of the most memorable quotes from the entire story.  The source of this quote comes from a man named Humbert Humbert, who happens to be the narrator as well.  In his memoire, Humbert tells us of his background beginning from his early adolescence in Europe- where he explains of his childhood romance (resulting in tragedy) that impacted him for the rest of his life- to his emigration to the United States, where we further follow his development and maturation into adulthood and so on.  So perhaps, one of the most interesting aspects of the novel is the multiple names given to Lolita by Humbert.  The way he fantasizes about her tells us that no matter what stage she is in her life; she’ll always be his little Lolita. 

Lolita play different roles in this novel, but I feel that H. H. certainly went through different transitions and took on different roles and experiences in his life as well.  Humbert, as scholarly and as well educated of a man he’s portrayed himself to be, there’s one profound flaw; and that is…he never truly grows up.  He’s completely aware of the fact that his immoral feelings towards young girls are wrong, as he states in this passage:

“All this I rationalize now.  In my twenties and early thirties, I did not understand my throes quite so clearly. While my body knew what it craved for, my mind rejected my body's every plea.  One moment I was ashamed and frightened, another recklessly optimistic. Taboos strangulated me.”

Yet, the intense emotions that boiled within as a youth impacted him so greatly, that he was never really able to move beyond the experience.  So, when he met 12-year-old, Dolores, his instant infatuation escalated to pure obsession.  So, this would be considered the first and major stage of his life.

His development and transitions from an innocent love-struck youth (ex: the romance with Annabel) to a manipulative (yet charming) man (ex: his young adult years), then a “father figure” who provides and nurtures Lolita from the world (ex: his relationship with Dolores "escalates" after he marries her mother), and then lastly we’re led to believe that maybe he’s indefinitely in love once again (ex: his desperate search for her for 2 years AND the mirrored romantic feelings he experienced as a young boy);  thus bringing him back full circle.

Well, I've conclusively decided that this novel- as disturbing at it may be- honestly was a remarkable book.  And I mean not in the sense of the "it was the greatest book", but it was noteworthy and it was truly that which was worth remarking about.

Director's Notes Assignment

Film:  Jackie Brown (Directed by Quentin Tarantino)


Plot Change...

Overall concept I wouldn’t want to change overall.  In my opinion, I feel that because it was already made, it’s already “out there” in the world.  In addition, It was only made once which means that others thought it wasn’t necessary to remake it because of it’s uniqueness.  Quentin Tarantino is known for his witty plot lines and complex, yet dynamic dialogue.   So, I find it difficult to compromise the creativity of someone that I appreciate.

Time...

Could be changed to Film-Noire

Location...

Could be changed to a train instead of a flight

Cast Change...

Maybe not necessary, but just change the wardrobe to the 1920-30’s time period.

The Day of the Locust

The 1930’s publication by Nathanael West was definitely interesting to read.  I’m a huge fan of the early 20^th century and all the fascinating and exciting cultural trends that arose during that period. 

West doesn’t shy away from writing using a dark and rather explicit tone.  If you’re looking for a romance novel…this is not it.  But on the other hand, life is not a romance novel- sometimes things don’t happen in a series of fortunate circumstances all leading to that “happily ever after”.  So I guess what I saying is that I like West’s realistic disposition toward the story. 

A little about the plot…West introduces us to the novel through the third-person omniscient perspective of Tod Hackett.  But, at one point in the novel the perspective shifts to Homer Simpson (another key character). 

Hackett, a gawky individual and painter, moves to California to take a position at a production studio.  Like many hopefuls of the time, Tod came to Hollywood to “make it big”, but so far he’s just barely skimming by.  In addition, as a personal project he decided to create a painting called “The Burning of Los Angeles”- a graphic and “apocalyptic” scene representing the lower-class who immigrated to California.

Shortly after arriving in L.A., Tod has gained a diverse set of “friends”- from a belligerent dwarf, named Abe Kusich, to an aspiring (yet untalented) film star, named Faye Greener.  We further become introduced to other male characters in the story- A cowboy who works as an extra in cowboy movies, his Mexican friend who frequently participates in cock fights, and a washed up businessman whom Faye is taking advantage of, named Homer Simpson.  All are so different; yet, they share one common interest- Faye.  Tod intends to include all these people in his painting, as well.

Tod’s painting could be considered an omen that leads up to "The" unfortunate event- concluding the book in sheer mayhem and catastrophe.  Damn, talk about an ending. 

Interestingly enough, I’m actually willing to read this novel at least a couple more times because I feel like I’ll be able to further understand the complex underlying themes and motives even more each time.

Hunger Games

To be honest I didn’t know anything about this story prior to the release of the book (written by Suzanne Collins).  As soon as production on the movie was in full swing the public took to the “blog-o-sphere”, and even uploaded amateur videos/ websites in anticipation of the release. Not holding back their true feelings about the upcoming movie, devotees are keeping close tabs on every decision Hollywood is making.  Most rejoice, but others announce their disapproval (ex: casting the heroine, Jennifer Lawrence was a wrong decision).

The story takes place in a futuristic world called Panem, which used to be North America. Penem is divided into 12 Districts- all severely ruled by a harsh government; The Capitol. We learn that 74 years prior to the beginning of the book, Panem rebelled against the Capitol. As an example to the other citizens never to undermine or rebel, District 13 was completely obliterated.  The “Hunger Games” is an annual televised event, where one girl and one boy from every district are chosen compete into an outdoor arena – literally battling for their lives.  And as a result, whoever is the last one standing receives fame, fortune, and their district gets privileges rained upon them for the next year.  (So wait…all that effort to stay alive and the rewards are only good for one year?...What a rip-off!)

Collin creates an interesting blend of two worlds.  The whole notion of people fighting to the death for the sake of entertainment is barbaric --dating back to the early days of Rome and the Gladiators fighting in the coliseums – except this time adolescent children are being used as pawns in this ruthless game.  Now for the twist, all of this is being broadcasted the audience via television– adding a modern and futuristic component to the story.  It’s like a game show, yet it’s disturbing that “entertainment” has succumbed to the demoralization of human lives.

The contextual ideas and themes in this story aren’t necessarily the most original creations.  A couple stories that immediately came to mind were “The Gladiator” and “Battle Royale”.  All contained similar underlying concepts, but I liked how she was able to produce her own uniqueness.  After reading this book, I’m definitely curious to see the movie and whether it fell short or remained true to the novel.

Metropolis

First and foremost…wow, what a cool movie!  I typically am not a fan of silent flicks because I tend to get too distracted noticing the way actors heavily dramatize themselves in each scene; I completely become disengaged with the storyline altogether.  But with Metropolis, I instantly became involved with the plot and the “overdoing” was not “overdid” this time.

This conception of Fritz Lang was simply a visually stunning film to watch.  For it’s time (released in 1927) the imaginative architectural backdrops were so grandeur.  It’s interesting, though, to note that there are two dramatically different styles of architecture being used.  One referenced a mythic and medieval style.  The other pushed ideas of envisioning a modernist and ultra-industrialized Utopia.  It’s interesting that the idea of total reliance of technology is not only feared by people presently, but even those 80 years ago felt the same way, too.  I’m a huge fan of architecture – the immense underground factory was especially visually appealing.

The Bible heavily influenced Lang’s creative motives, as well.  For example, the social progress of the citizens was diminished to heavy imagery of enslavement (just like the epic and grueling engineering of the construction of the Tower of Babel)- the city being Babel or course.  Also, Lang was greatly ambitious to take on the ever-debatable themes of capitol and labor issues, and political manipulation.

Encircled by all this drama was a blooming love between Freder and Maria. Freder is the son of the city’s ruler and Maria is the “prophetess” who speaks about a future,in which a mediator will unite the hands of the workers and the brains of the rulers- eventually ensuing a revolt.   Although, we quickly learn that the “evil” scientist, Rotwang has perfected a mechanical man that can look like anyone he chooses. He assures Joh (the city’s ruler/ Freder’s father) that this will replace the Workers and become the perfect slave of tomorrow.  Unfortunately Maria becomes the mold from which the robot takes her appearance, to be his forever. 

Regardless of the 2 hour run time, this film is filled with drama from beginning to end.  It’s certainly made its mark in film history.