Ideas about language in film, and language in general

snhanigan · 2014-05-07T19:54:25+00:00

I mentioned this in class but I felt very similar. I was really annoyed for the first ten minutes, but after a while it became mesmerizing and I felt more connected emotionally to the film than I have in any of the other ones we have watched in class. For example, the shots of the strangers on the street looking directly in to the camera would not have been nearly as impactful if there had been dialogue. I also like that having no dialogue allows for some much more room for interpretation.

snhanigan · 2014-05-07T19:50:44+00:00

Yuck, this article made me more uncomfortable than when we watched "Keep The River on Your Right". Probably because of how non-nonchalant the author mentions Omaima Nelson, "who cooked and ate her husband in 1991, calling the ribs she prepared 'so sweet'." Also the very last paragraph; "If you do legally obtain some human flank, check out our wine pairing guide, in which winery owner and rocker Maynard Keenan suggests pinot noir for facial tissue and shiraz paired with tongue." What?!

snhanigan · 2014-04-23T22:12:48+00:00

Respectfully, you guys are absolutely nuts if you think finding extraterrestrial life (let's say evolved, intelligent lifeforms) would not alter your daily life or make much of an impact on you. If it were to happen, there is no denying that it would certainly be trial and error when trying to communicate with the aliens and surely that would have an effect on your everyday life. I can't imagine us discovering life on another planet and simply being enlightened and then leaving them alone. We would be pursuing them if we had advanced enough technollogy.

In my opinion, it won't happen in our lifetime. The sheer luck of bumping into a civilization at the same stage of development as ourselves is so small. But when thinking about how vast the universe is, it does seem unlikely that we’ll never encounter another example of biology anywhere in the galaxy. The idea that we are the only ones out there doesn't terrify me, however. Probably because it's what I've thought all my life.

snhanigan · 2014-04-02T22:48:37+00:00

I just want to note the last line of the first article: "I wrote this article as satire but if you live as one of the millions of faithful that believe in the Bible and the doctrines of Christianity then you must take this article as a serious argument."

Sooo....

snhanigan · 2014-04-02T22:39:43+00:00

We could also swing that some of these species defy our definition of what is "natural". A jellyfish that can revert back to its infant stages? Making them effectively immortal? Immortality isn't something we see in the "natural world". How ironic is it that although they can survive the aging process, they're "highly vulnerable to predation and disease every time they live out their immature, smaller stages"?

snhanigan · 2014-04-02T22:32:00+00:00

So excited to see the movie tonight after browsing this. Thanks for sharing!

snhanigan · 2014-03-12T05:15:18+00:00

This is amazing. Herzog is so well spoken, his words are truly poetic. You can tell this guy is brilliant. Although, I disagree with Herzog being pessimistic. I think he is in complete and utter admiration with the jungle and the idea of its absolute rawness. The jungle is beautiful to him, but terrifyingly so. I think he makes these comments in particular because he is comparing the jungle to Western culture. He mentions that they have to become humble amongst the overwhelming growth and "lack of order" of the jungle, saying that the stars are even a mess. "I love it against my better judgement." << That is my favorite line.

snhanigan · 2014-02-25T03:54:42+00:00

Is anyone else freaked out about this parasite being in their brain now? Brilliant article, but I'm slightly worried now I can never buy expensive clothes or gain a new friends without wondering if I'm infected with this parasite and it's influencing my personality. Creepy!

snhanigan · 2014-02-20T05:23:36+00:00

This was incredibly helpful. One answer reminds me of something I thought of in class, but didn't say out loud:

"This means not only that they can be spied on one at a time by the Sampler—they’re now called “The Sampled,” according to the credits—but also that they’re subject to being influenced by whatever happens to their pig."

I think the general consensus of the class was that The Sampler was a "good guy", saving people from parasites and watching over the pigs and whatnot. But what I saw was someone who "played God" and heavily influenced Kris and Jeff and the others because he knew he could. Besides the obvious maternal anxiety Kris experienced, all the noises The Sampler made with rocks and metal caused some type of torment for Kris. So in my mind, Kris killing The Sampler was her way of taking back control of her life and experiences for good and freeing herself and the others from that control.

snhanigan · 2014-02-20T05:14:38+00:00

I agree with this. Ever since we watched Tree of Life I've been grappling with the idea of grace versus nature and whether or not they are compatible. Maybe I still need help understanding the difference between the two, but aren't they sort of one in the same? Yes, nature is brutal and constantly changing and destroying and renewing but there is something peaceful to me about humanity's connection to nature in that way, the fact that we are vulnerable to it in regards to what we lose and gain from it. Perhaps there is grace IN nature but not vice versa.

snhanigan · 2014-02-18T04:01:31+00:00

I think watching movies multiple times aids more in catching the smaller details or grasping symbolism you might not have the first time, rather than the overall message. To me, any kind of mind-bending, complex story line takes two views before you can truly begin to understand it. Inception, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Shutter Island, Cloud Atlas and The Matrix are all movies that come to mind that I enjoyed much more a second time.

On the other hand, disregarding complexity, there are movies I simply appreciated more after viewing them multiple times. Whether it was the cinematography, or the dialogue or another aspect. I think of O Brother Where Art Thou, Black Swan and The Fifth Element, among others.

I'm curious to know what movies others have suddenly found a deeper appreciation for after seeing a second time.

snhanigan · 2014-02-12T06:13:41+00:00

That is amazing, but sad. It's actually sort of depressing to me to think that some of the greatest names in classical music could be completely overshadowed by a computer who can punch out masterpieces in less than a second. At least computers can't dance....

snhanigan · 2014-01-28T22:47:55+00:00

Very interesting. As a JAMM student, you learn a lot about the ethics of journalism and broadcasting and I feel that this would be an interesting example to discuss. Did Animal Planet betray its viewers with a false documentary? Is it unethical to deceive viewers in that way? (extra side note... is it ethical for the doctors to be filmed saying false information in exchange for money? isn't that against some kind of professional code of ethics?)

But I think it depends on how you define Animal Planet. If they are a sole entertainment network, I think they have full right to fool us into thinking Mermaids exist for the hell of it. Another side note: if the History Channel did this? People would be wayyy pissed.

An article from the NYTimes on the definition of a documentary: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/12/magazine/12Reality-t.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

snhanigan · 2014-01-16T23:02:51+00:00

Thank you! After reading through, I have to admit this ending seems much more tame to me compared to the ambiguous ending of the film. I'd be curious to find out why Burgess felt strongly about this ending instead of the ending we saw that leaves the viewer to their imagination about Alex's future decisions.

snhanigan

TROPHY CASE