Post Six - The Changing Portrayal of Women in Films

Since the Hollywood studio system began the representation of women has been a topic of discussion. Many feminist theorists have argued that Hollywood films use fixed and repeated images of women which reflect myths about women and femininity encouraging typical female stereotypes.

This post will look over some of the key points in cinema history and how women’s portrayal has changed in films over the past 90 years.

Classic narrative films have been looked at first and how women have been portrayed through these films. Looking at typical Hollywood films beginning in the 1920’s women are portrayed as powerless objects of desire (Cook and Bernink, 1999). Men on the other hand are starring in roles as active, powerful businessmen. This structure of films has been looked at by theorist Laura Mulvey. Mulvey has looked at the ways in which both narrative and visual techniques turn voyeurism into a male prerogative.

“Within the narrative of the film, male characters direct their gaze towards female characters. The spectator in the theatre is made to identify with the male look.” (Cook and Bernink, 1999)

When watching classic narrative films the audience watches from the male perspective. There are three levels of the cinematic gaze:

•   Camera
•   Character
•   Spectator

Mulvey argues that these factors make women an object of desire in these films. An example being the classic Breakfast at Tiffany’s starring Audrey Hepburn. Hepburn plays a beautiful socialite who is pursued by a writer living in the same apartment block. She is seen as the object in this film as the storyline surrounds George Peppard pursuing her.

The male characters in these films have more powerful egos meaning the audience automatically identifies with the male rather than the female.

Hollywood films were repeatedly being made for the male desire so early feminists made women’s films that would go against traditional Hollywood storylines and techniques and from this we get women’s cinema or counter cinema.

Feminist counter cinema took its inspiration from avant-garde and theatre. It was part of the 1970’s film making and the coincided with the second wave of feminism. These counter cinema films avoided Hollywood conventions and accommodated a female point of view (Cook and Bernink, 1999).

An example of a feminist film is the short film Thriller, this film was re-written from a classic called La Boheme. The main character Mimi is split into Mimi I and Mimi II. Mimi I investigates how she is portrayed as an object and finds out that the female cannot be part of the male language or classic narrative. Mimi I investigates her death and doing this she explores what separates her from the “bad girl” in the film. This film uses mirror shots and one key moment is when Mimi I recognises she is an object she is shown with her back to the mirror and facing the camera this image is repeated on several mirrors behind her instead of showing the back of her head. This complex shot shows Mimi I’s recognition of her split self. From this it is shown that women understand they are not split so should not be split through film narrative. This film is directed by Sally Potter and provides a female version of the original La Boheme.

Counter cinema provided a door for women to be seen as powerful women in films rather than objects of desires like those written in classic narrative films.

Another key portrayal of women through films is the vamp. This image of women on screen was originally from Europe but made its way into Hollywood cinema and provides female spectators with a positive, independent image of femininity. Women spectators can relate and identify with this character as this image of women is positive.

This image of women can be seen in film noir films; this woman uses her sexuality and attractiveness to manipulate men to gain power. This character in Film Noir rejects all typical female roles such as loving mothers and housewives and in the end the disobedience of social norms leads her to self destruction or destruction of others. Film Noir’s portrayal of Femme fatale supports the likes of classic narrative storylines because although this female character is powerful she is punished for it in the end.

When first looking at film noir films the femme fatale character receives a punishment for not playing a typical female role, looking at this a bit closer film noir films showed that women are constrained to playing the same roles in other films. At the end of these films it is the fearless femme fatale that sticks in the audience’s minds because she stays true to her destructive nature unlike any other female characters of the time.

Film noir was another movement in which women were to be seen as more powerful greater things than just objects of desire.

Another key portrayal of women through films is through the genre of horror films. In almost all critical writings of horror films women are shown to be the victims. Looking at classic horror films such as Psycho this is the case, the last girl tends to be sought after by the killer making the so called “Final Girl” the killers chosen victim. Looking at horror films on a modern scale this is now not the case. Taking Scream as an example, Sidney Prescott is a teenage girl whom Scream is trying to kill. She is seen as a victim in this film with constant attempts by Scream to kill her but she could also be classed as the feisty “Final Girl” she is the one girl through the film who fights, resists and survives from the killer that is Scream. The “Final Girl” character is masculinised through what has been described as the male gaze, therefore dominates the action. In modern horrors the “Final Girl” becomes her own saviour. This characters self rescue turns her into a hero.
 

This modern take on horror films has again made way for women to be represented as strong and powerful. Although mainly all critical writings speak about women as victims, women can also play a very different part in horror films as the monster.

Barbara Creed is an author who discusses this topic in the book Monstrous-Feminine. Creed views the portrayal of women in horrors differently to most theorists. For example in the film Carrie, Carrie plays the part of a witch. This role is unconventional in the fact that it isn’t often seen but the part of a witch in films is always played by a woman. This theorists argument is that man fears women and see's women as ambiguous and from this develops these unconventional, monstrous female characters.

As a result womens portrayal in films has certainly moved on with the times. Looking back at the 1920’s where women could only play conventional stereotypical roles such as housewives compared to today where women can fight killers and become their own saviours, women characters in films have definitely changed. Although the one thing that has stayed the same is that women can still be seen as objects of desire, this may have been evened up on a modern scale with men also being seen as objects of desire in genres such as chick flicks.

COOK, P and BERNINK, M (1999). The Cinema Book. 2nd ed. London: British Film Institute. 353-362.

CREED, B (1993). The Monstrous-Feminine. Oxon: Routledge. 73-83.

http://www.filmnoirstudies.com/essays/progressive.asp

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2009/oct/13/ridley-scott-alien-ripley

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1138946/Hollywood-portrays-women-image-obsessed-man-mad-idiots-says-British-academic.html

Post Five - Rango Review

Production Year: 2011

Country: USA

Cert (UK): U

Runtime: 107 minutes

Directors: Gore Verbinski

“This way to Dirt…”

When originally sitting down to watch the much anticipated CGI animated, animal western; Rango, who would have known the thought to be kid’s animation had a possible better suiting to an adult audience.

Johnny Depp plays the green, crooked necked chameleon; Rango. Although the film is family friendly Depp adds a certain edginess to it with reference to the well known novel turned film by Hunter S. Thompson; “Fear and Loathing”. These characteristics plus a certain arty weirdness make the film a thrill to watch as an adult as well as perfectly suitable for children. 

The film hasn’t followed the cinematic trend by going 3D but doesn’t really need too as the remarkable CGI animation makes every tiny detail on screen look extremely realistic.

Rango is a pet chameleon who ends up stranded in the Nevada desert after a car accident. He is lost, out of his comfort zone and is extremely thirsty in the scorching sunlight with no shadow to hide under. After getting into a spot of bother with an eagle he finds himself in a small western town called Dirt. The town is populated by a variety if desert critters whom all play a part in this spaghetti western like film.

Rango arrives in Dirt and fancies himself as a bit of hero although heroes in Dirt don’t go down too well. He is appointed sheriff and is trying his best to fit in with his new surroundings.

The town’s water supply is close to running out and Rango wants to help and save the day. But is the water supply simply running out? Or is there more to this than meets the eye? 

The plotting of the film is narrated by a group of Spanish singing birds, this adds to the oddness of the characters making the film a strange, thrilling and interesting watch, but what else would be expected from Verbinski, the director of “Pirates of the Caribbean”. 

Verbinski also adapted an unusual way of directing this film by using the people voicing the characters to act scenes on a set up stage using this for help with animation. 

Even though there is a slight confusion over Rango’s target audience, Verbinski has certainly shown his true colours with this clever but weird film. This along with the outstanding animation and gripping storyline makes Rango a must see watch.

Rating: 

http://www.rangomovie.com/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/8360336/Rango-review.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/mar/06/rango-review

http://cinema.theiapolis.com/movie-2SB1/rango/storyline.html

Post Four - Implicit and Explicit Ideologies in Films

“Ideology is a relatively systematic body of ideas, attitudes, values, and perceptions, as well as, actual modes of thinking (usually unconscious) typical of a given class or group of people in a specific time and place.” (Hess, 1978)

All films made whether Hollywood blockbusters or low budget independent films all represent ideologies from the culture and attitudes at the time. The above quote written by John Hess is a good definition of ideologies in films.

Cultures vary depending on when and where a film has been made. In a report written for scribd.com the author discusses two films that represent WW2, Catch 22 (1970) and Saving Private Ryan (1998). Both films represent the same time period but due to the 38 year gap between each being made, they both contrast and contradict each other.

The article also discusses cinema as a communicative medium which has culturally bound implications and mediums. From this films can be divided into implicit and explicit ideologies. 

Disney films are perfect examples of implicit ideologies. They are mainstream films but always have embedded messages within them. Take Wall-E for example, the title gives nothing away about the themes and is a film set in the future about humans leaving the earth due to pollution. Wall-E (a robot) has been left to clean up the years of pollution. All humans have left the earth and are now living on a spaceship which offers the highest technology so that they need to do nothing for themselves, not even walk. The ideological message here is about the worlds over reliance on technology as well as a warning to pollution. The film has a happy ending with the humans returning to earth to help clean up, another ideology here is that teamwork solves and helps everything.

An example of a film with an explicit meaning is The Wizard of Oz. The film is a well known classic about a young girl (Dorothy) who is dreaming of running away from her dull life on the farm she lives on. She ends up in Oz, a colourful odd place with munchkin’s, witches, flying monkeys and a wizard. She becomes friends with a scarecrow, a tinman and a lion and asks them to help her find her way home. She has to make her way to the Wizard of Oz in hope that he will grant her the wish of returning home. The explicit message here is the meaning of the film, once she had left home she realised how much she loved and missed her family. This was shown at the end of the film when for Dorothy to return home the line “There’s no place like home” had to be repeated.

These are just a few examples of ideologies in films but all films have underlying meanings in which its up to viewer to decipher and understand.

  

http://www.scribd.com/doc/97612/Ideology-and-Cultural-Meaning

http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC17folder/FilmAndIdeololgy.html

http://www.wsu.edu/~hughesc/film_and_ideology.htm

http://www.esfmedia.com/page/Wall-E+-+Ideology

http://hubpages.com/hub/Wizard-of-Oz-Analysis

Post Three - Mainstream Cinema

Today Hollywood films are classed as "mainstream", they follow specific standards and use specific techniques. This much so that you can spot a Hollywood film just by the actors used, the storyline made and camera techniques. 

A set of films which decided to reject the Hollywood system are Dogme 95 films. This new wave of films was started by Lars Von Triers and Thomas Vinterberg in 1995, they both met up and made a VOW OF CHASITY to making films which was then unveiled at the 100th anniversary of cinema. 

In total, 31 Dogme films were made before the Dogmesecretariat closed down in June 2002. The Dogme films were almost like a rebellion against Hollywood/ mainstream films, using handheld cameras and no added lighting or sound. Even though the films were a success, the Dogme films didn't want to be seen as a genre hence why they shut down in 2002. Filmmakers today are still encouraged to go on taking the VOW for historical purposes.

This was a revolution in film making subverting mainstream standards but there are many films that conform to these standards. With mainstream films you can usually predict the plot as a lot of them have the same storyline and characters, a film which subverts the mainstream and Hollywood film making standards is Bunny and the Bull.

 Bunny and the Bull is a British film directed by Paul King. The storyline features a man called Stephen Turnbull who hasn't left his house in months due to an unforeseen circumstance. The film goes back to a road trip with his friend Bunny. During his flashbacks the set is made out of things from his flat, for example milk bottles make a bar wall and a Ferris wheel being made out of the inside of a clock to signify that it is in the past. The storyline is also very unpredictable with a sudden turn towards the end. These characteristics help this film to identify as a subvert to the Hollywood and mainstream system.

 

Going from one extreme to the other, a film which conforms the mainstream standards is the well known romantic comedy Pretty Women. This film conforms to the standards of Hollywood through many characteristics. Number one is the films choice of actors, Julia Roberts and Richard Gere. Big actors sell films. As well as this the storyline of Pretty Women is very predictable, Roberts plays an unconventional part as a hooker where Gere plays the typical male role as a rich tycoon. They meet and end up falling in love, the film comes to an end with a typical fairytale ending leaving the audience content. Mainstream films, depending on genre tend to have the same plot. The big named actors and predictable storyline help to identify this film as a mainstream film.

These are just two films and a few examples that demonstrate how films can conform to Hollywood standards and how they can subvert these standards.

http://faculty.washington.edu/mlg/courses/definitions/counter-cinema.htm

http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC27folder/EpicThCounterCinema.html 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2009/nov/30/bunny-and-the-bull

http://www.thefilmjournal.com/issue9/dogme95.html

Post Two - Auteurship

"A filmmaker whose individual style and complete control over all elements of production give a film It’s personal and unique stamp."

Auteur is derived from the word author. The auteur policy was started by an article written by Francios Truffaut who critisised filming in the 1950's. Various film critics have had input to the auteur policy but Andrew Sarris was the man who turned it into a theory. Sarris claims there are 3 levels of Auteurship: 

• Technical competence.
• Distinguishable personality such as recognisable camera shots and script. 
• Director as a person, meaning the directors own personal views

"The auteur theory values the personality of a director precisely because of the barriers to its expression."

Sarris explains that whether directors are from Hollywood or Europe the films made will be shaped by the conditions and culture at the time. Meaning films made are affected by external factors.

Although Auteurship originates from Europe in the 1950's and great Auteurs include Jean-Luc Godard and Ingmar Bergman the auteur theory can be applied to famous Hollywood directors such as Quentin Tarantino.

Quentin Tarantino has been writing and directing films for the past 20 years. He shot into the limelight with his first film Reservoir Dogs in 1992 and since then has been involved in making some of the biggest films in Hollywood to date.  His films are very recognisble but to understand how Tarantino can be described as an Auteur a selection of his finest films need to be looked at. 

Tarantino's films tend to follow multiple storylines which all tie up at the end. Pulp Fiction, Kill Bill and Inglorious Basterds all pursue various storylines following different characters but all link in to each other at the end. This is a recognisable trait on Tarantino's part and makes his films interesting to watch.

Another identifiable trait of Tarantino is the extreme use of blood and gore in his films. Whether its gun shots in Pulp Fiction, Samurai Fighting in Kill Bill or WWI slaughter in Inglorious Basterds no expense is spared. They certainly aren't for the faint hearted.

Tarantino is also credited for his strange choice of word choice in his films such as the famous clip in Pulp Fiction when Travolta and Jackson discuss Big Macs even though they are cold blooded hitmen, it always adds a sense of humour even through the blood and gore.

One last most noticeable trait is Tarantino's choice to have the movie credits at the beginning of his films instead of at the end.This is a rather old fashioned but makes Tarantino's films distinguishable from the rest.

Tarantino’s films are extremely recognisable from the opening credits to the end scene when you figure out Tarantino's multiple storylines, and for these reasons Tarantino can definitely be called an Auteur.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/auteur

http://www.filmreference.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS_ROi0iiZw

http://www.bullz-eye.com/entertainers/quentin_tarantino.htm

http://passionforcinema.com
http://www.onlygoodmovies.com/blog/good-movies/quentin-tarantino-movies/

Post One - Pre 1930's Cinema Defining Moments

1. Monkeyshines No1

 
Thomas Edison and William K.L Dickson are stated to be the reasons behind the birth of US cinema. Although Edison gets credit, Dickson invented the first camera and projector. The Kinetograph was invented in November 1890. It photographed motion pictures through a motor powered camera and was one of the main reasons film grew to be so popular in the late 1890’s. Dickson also invented the first projector called the Kinetoscope. Monkeyshines No 1 was Dickson’s first film, it features one of his laboratory assistants, Sacco Albanese and is was filmed by the Kinetoscope.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVintjK5lKU

http://www.filmsite.org/pre20sintro.html

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0361921/

2. The Lumiere Brothers

The Lumiere Brothers followed Edison's and Dickson's footsteps and also invented a movie camera projector combination called the Cinematographe. The device was more profitable as an audience was now able to view the filmed piece. The first public test of the Cinematographe was on March 22nd 1895. The film consisted of workers leaving the Lumiere factory and was projected in the Lumiere Brother's basement on December 28th of the same year. This was the first commercial exhibition of motion picture and where cinema as we know today was born.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYpKZx090UE

http://www.filmsite.org/pre20sintro2.html

http://www.holonet.khm.de/visual_alchemy/lumiere.html

3. First Science Fiction Film

 

Georges Melies was a French director whom directed the first ever science fiction film. Voyage dans la Lune/ A Trip to the Moon was a 14 minute feature loosely based on a book by Jules Verne (From Earth to the Moon, 1865) and a book by H.G Wells (First Men on the moon, 1901) and as told by the title features a mission to the moon. Melies didn't just direct the film he wrote, acted, designed the set, photographed and produced this movie. Melies also perfected the art of editing in this film making it a sought after piece and has certainly paved the way for science fiction today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JDaOOw0MEE

http://www.filmsite.org/voya.html

4. Kinemacolor

Kinemacolor was developed in 1906 and produced some of the first colour films. It was invented by American Charles Urban and British George Albert Smith. It was an early breakthrough in colour and worked by a simple two step additive process using red and green. A Visit to the Seaside was the first commercially produced film in this natural colour. The clip shown above was one of the world's first coloured feature films, it is a documentary called The Durbar of Delhi. Unfortunately Kinemcolor didn't take off due to the First World War and patenting problems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMYSMH-eMkU&feature=related

http://www.filmsite.org/pre20sintro4.html

5. Charlie Chaplin

Charlie Chaplin is one if not the most well known actor pre 1930's. His film debut was during the silent films era in Kid Auto Races At Venice (1914). He was well known for his moustache and baggy trousers. The clip above shows Chaplin in The Tramp (1915) where he shows off his signature look along with a walk his character was known for. His routines were classed as slapstick comedy which certainly set a high standard for comedy throughout the years including likes of Laurel and Hardy.

http://www.filmsite.org/pre20sintro4.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPwEEHAF6tc&feature=related

Hello...

Hey and welcome to my blog. It has been created for my Cinema and Society class for my 4th year at Robert Gordon's University studying Communication with Public Relations. I will be posting up various clips and reviews to build up a good base of information on cinema and society.


Here's a link to my Cinema and Society class:


http://rgucinemasociety.blogspot.com/