The lecture from Week One was repeated in this week so I will focus on our first tutorial instead.
A tautology was raised: that the reason we watch films is because there is an inherent human instinct which makes us worry for the characters. Students protested, citing many film genres, whose conventional make-up suggest a happy ending as a default. In these cases, although we know consciously that all will be well in the end, the worry becomes about how this resolution will come about. My one criticism of this relates to an analogy that was used; it was suggested that even if Arsenal were playing a team of cripples, a fan would still watch, simply out of worry for his team. As a continuation of the idea that was raised earlier, in regards to worrying about characters in films that we know will end happily, what is the reason for watching a game of sport when we know the conclusion. There are other factors; for instance, the other night I watched a repeat of the Waratahs game despite knowing that they won by a comfortable margin. I was interested to see the tries scored, who played well in relation to national selection, and more-so, to see how well they played. Perhaps the worry concerned with every game could be extended to worry for the outcome of the entire season?
A second proposition to be raised in the tutorial was that all films have a premise. Good narrative films will not state this premise too bluntly, and instead will provide audiences with a “fair fight”. I must say I am less convinced by this second idea. There have been films which are so strongly driven by narrative or some stylistic motif that premise have been overlooked. Unless you can conclude that narrative or stylistic features count as premise. Wes Anderson’s more recent films seem to be absent of premise, as do some of Tarentino’s films, even some of Kubrick’s films, The Shining, for instance. What is the premise there? Steer clear of anyone with eyes as creepy as Jack Nicholson’s? Horror/Thriller films are actually quite good examples of films which seem to lack a premise. Their ontology is based on narrative progression. They are polemically opposite to a didactic Disney film for instance.
Hi Joel
ReplyDeleteGood posts; detailed and passionate. However i think you missed the point of the idea of Worry and the Analogy of soccer players playing cripples. The idea is actually the opposite of what you say in your blog post - "if Arsenal were playing a team of cripples, a fan would still watch" What I was suggesting was the opposite. That even a hardened Arsenal fan wouldn't bother watching a game with cripples because there would be nothing to worry about. Its the 'struggle' thats important - the duopoly between Hope and Fear - Hope they win but fearing they wont.
Your point about watching a replay of a game despite knowing the outcome is valid but its also a very different mode of viewing, a different emotional response to that of watchign the game the first time. Its not a narrative-experience the second time around - its more a documentary study.
Certainly there are exceptions to the idea Worry (Baraka stands out for example) but such filsm are also generally outside of notions of Narrative.
Regarding Premise you are also dead right - there are many films (and sometime even good films) that seem to be complete devoid of a premise (being a belief or a point of view on the part of the filmmakers - Shining being an excellent example) But I think your making a mistake to align Premise with Disney and Didactic storytelling and somehow that Narrative is separate from Premise. Thats a very extreme polarisation that you'll need to backup for it to have any weight. You say Horro/Thriller films lack premise but I think you'll find this is very much not the case. Almost all Horror films (much like scifi) are reactions to social fears present at the time of their making. The History of Horror films is a history of what societies have been scared of at a macro level. Psycho coems out of the freeways of america bypassing small towns in the 60s and the isolation of communities. The Exorcist comes after the Hippy era of the 60s where the scared cows of religion and morality were tossed away which manifests as a fear in the 70s that perhaps "we got it wrong"... Most good Horror films ahve very clear Moral Premises. hence the Horror Archetypes of the "first victim' (the promiscuous chick) and the 'final girl' (the conservative who was slutty) Texas Chainsaw Masacare for example.
Your points are valid but you need to read a bit wider and make a much stronger argument.
Cheers
Mike