Baylor University Department of Communication Fall 2013 Screening: Seminar: Wednesday 7:00 11:00 p.m., Castellaw 101 Thursday 2:00 4:45 p.m., Castellaw 138 Professor: Office: Office Hours: Phone: E-Mail: Web Site: Dr. James Kendrick Castellaw 119 By appointment 710-6061 james_kendrick@baylor.edu http://blogs.baylor.edu/james_kendrick COURSE DESCRIPTION This seminar will cover the major issues and concepts that have been taken up by contemporary film theorists in the years following World War II, with particular concentration in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s. While theory during the first half of the 20th century (often referred to as classical film theory) was mostly concerned with questions of ontology, aesthetics, and realism, contemporary film theory has been heavily influenced by cultural studies and ideological criticism, particularly as formulated from Marxist and psychoanalytical perspectives, and has therefore delved into previously ignored questions of race, gender, politics, and spectatorship. However, in recent years, with the advent of digital cinema and the profound impact it is having on everything from production to reception, film theory has started to circle back into questions of technology and ontology. REQUIRED TEXTS Timothy Corrigan, Patricia White, & Meta Mazaj, eds. Critical Visions in Film Theory: Classic and Contemporary Readings, 7th ed. New York: Bedford/St. Martin s, 2010. All other readings available on Blackboard (http://my.baylor.edu)
FDM 5376 Contemporary Film Theory Syllabus page 2 COURSE REQUIREMENTS Theorist Overview Paper / Presentation (30%) Each student will select one important theorist/critic (either classical or contemporary) who we are not reading as part of the course and research his or her contributions to film theory. This will require that you read a substantial amount of this theorist/critic s theoretical writings (i.e., you should not rely heavily on secondary interpretations of his or her works, but rather form your own opinions). You will then write an 8- to 10-page paper summarizing and critiquing the most important elements of this theorist s work and also present your findings to the rest of the class (one or two students will present during each class meeting starting on Oct. 3). The paper should be type-written and double-spaced, use MLA style, and include a complete bibliography. On or before September 19 you must e-mail me the name of the person you wish to write about/present on and briefly justify his or her importance to film studies. The final paper is due by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, October 23. You must submit a hard copy to me and you must also submit an electronic copy via Turnitin on Blackboard. Critical Theory Paper (50%) On the last day of the semester you will submit a 20- to 25-page critical paper (including a complete bibliography) that uses film theory to interrogate a pertinent question regarding any of the issues we have raised in class. The paper should demonstrate a strong understanding of the theory or theories you are utilizing to illuminate a film or body of films. It should be type-written and double-spaced using MLA style. On or before Wednesday, October 16 you must submit a two-page proposal for your paper to be approved by me. This proposal should outline (1) why your topic is interesting, (2) how your thesis relates to the theoretical issues we have been discussing in class, and (3) how your paper will be organized. It should also include a representative bibliography with at least 10 sources. The final paper is due to me in my office no later than 5:00 p.m. on Monday, Dec. 9, and before submitting the hard copy you must also submit an electronic copy via Turnitin on Blackboard. Class Discussion Leader and Participation (20%) Your participation grade is based on regular attendance and your active involvement in class discussions. As this is a discussion-based seminar, it is imperative that you participate regularly in every class session, which invigorates our discussion of the topic with multiple points of view and also illustrates to me that you have adequately prepared for class by carefully and studiously reading everything that was assigned. In addition, each week one student will be assigned as an expert for each reading, which means you should come to class prepared to lead discussion and be armed with thought-provoking questions and additional background material to illuminate the assigned reading. Also, the night before you are to present you must e-mail me an outline of the reading for which you are responsible and a list of questions/issues you plan to raise in class the next day. GRADING SCALE A = 93 100 B- = 80 82 D = 60 67 A- = 90 92 C+ = 78 79 F = 0 59 B+ = 88 89 C = 73 77 B = 83 87 C- = 70 72
FDM 5376 Contemporary Film Theory Syllabus page 3 ACADEMIC INTEGRITY In this class, there is an absolute zero tolerance policy on cheating in any form, including plagiarism. It is your responsibility to familiarize yourself with the university s policies and what constitutes plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty in the Baylor Student Handbook (http://www.baylor.edu/student_policies). If you are caught cheating in any way, at the minimum you will receive a zero for that assignment, although the penalty may be more severe, depending on the circumstances. All instances of cheating will be reported to the university s Honor Council. STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS If you have any special learning needs, please see me during the first week of class so we can be sure you get the proper accommodations. However, before seeing me you must first register with the Office of Access and Learning Accommodation (OALA) (http://www.baylor.edu/oala).
FDM 5376 Contemporary Film Theory Syllabus page 4 COURSE SCHEDULE Week 1 (Aug. 28 29): Issues in Contemporary Film Theory Vertigo (Alfred Hitchcock, 1958) Andrew, The Three Ages of Cinema Studies and the Age to Come [Blackboard] Rodowick, The Virtual Life of Film Part I [Blackboard] Ravetto-Biagioli, Vertigo and the Vertiginous History of Film Theory [Blackboard] Week 2 (Sept. 4 5): Revisiting Classical Film Theory Part I: Formalism and Expressionism In the Mood for Love (Wong Kar-Wai, 2000) Kracauer, Basic Concepts and Inherent Affinities in Critical Visions (289 308) Balázs, The Creative Camera, The Close-Up, The Face of Man in Critical Visions (125 135) Eisenstein, The Dramaturgy of Film Form in Critical Visions (262 279) Week 3 (Sept. 11 12): Revisiting Classical Theory Part II: Questions of Realism Letter Never Sent (Mikhail Kalatozov, 1959) Bazin, The Ontology of the Photographic Image and The Evolution of the Language of Cinema in Critical Visions (309 325) Arnheim, Film and Reality in Critical Visions (279 288) Deren, Cinematography: The Creative Use of Reality in Critical Visions (144 156)
Week 4 (Sept. 18 19): The Troubles With Auteurism Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012) FDM 5376 Contemporary Film Theory Syllabus page 5 Sarris, The Auteur Theory Revisited in Critical Visions (354 360) Wollen, The Auteur Theory in Critical Visions (361 375) Barthes, The Death of the Author in Critical Visions (345 350) Corrigan, The Commerce of Auteurism in Critical Visions (416 429) If you re not familiar with Michael Haneke s previous work, please read his profile at Sense of Cinema (http:// sensesofcinema.com/2010/great-directors/michael-haneke) and view at least one of his other films on your own time, preferable Funny Games (1997), Cache (2005), or The White Ribbon (2009). Reminder! By Thursday, Sept. 19 you must e-mail me the name of the theorist/critic you will be writing about/presenting on and briefly justify his or her importance to film studies.) Week 5 (Sept. 25 26): Psychoanalysis, Subjectivity, and Identification Peeping Tom (Michael Powell, 1959) Friedberg, A Denial of Difference: Theories of Cinematic Identification [Blackboard] Christian Metz, From the Imaginary Signifier in Critical Visions (17 34) Week 6 (Oct. 2 3): The Ideological Turn 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her (Jean-Luc Godard, 1967) Baudry, Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematographic Apparatus in Critical Visions (34 43) Hall, The Problem of Ideology: Marxism Without Guarantees [Blackboard] Comolli and Narboni, Cinema/Ideology/Criticism in Critical Visions (478 487)
Week 7 (Oct. 9 10): Gender and the Feminist Turn FDM 5376 Contemporary Film Theory Syllabus page 6 The Silence of the Lambs (Jonathan Demme, 1991) Mulvey, Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema in Critical Visions (713 725) Mulvey, Afterthoughts on Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema [Blackboard] Freeland, Feminist Frameworks for Horror Films [Blackboard] Week 8 (Oct. 16 17): No Class or Screening By 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday Oct. 16 you need to submit your two-page critical theory paper proposal, which I will return to you in class next week. You may either leave the proposal in my mailbox or slide it under my office door. Week 9 (Oct. 23 24): Postmodernism and Simulacra A.I. Artificial Intelligence (Steven Spielberg, 2001) Huyssen, Mapping the Postmodern [Blackboard] Baudrillard, The Precession of Simulacra [Blackboard] Jameson, Postmodernism, and Consumer Society in Critical Visions (1031 1041) Reminder! Theorist Overview Paper due by 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, Oct. 23.
Week 10 (Oct. 30 31): Cinema in the Digital Age King Kong (Peter Jackson, 2005) FDM 5376 Contemporary Film Theory Syllabus page 7 Manovich, What is Digital Cinema? in Critical Visions (1058 1070) Allen, The Impact of Digital Technologies on Film Aesthetics [Blackboard] Whissel, Tales of Upward Mobility: The New Verticality and Digital Special Effects [Blackboard] Week 11 (Nov. 6 7): The Future and/or End of Cinema Sin City (Frank Miller & Robert Rodriguez, 2005) Jenkins, The Work of Theory in the Age of Digital Transformations (http://web.mit.edu/cms/people/ henry3/pub/digitaltheory.htm) Friedberg, The End of Cinema: Multimedia and Technological Change [Blackboard] Niessen, Lives of Cinema: Against Its Death [Blackboard] Week 12 (Nov. 14 15): Critical Race Theory Special Wednesday Screening / Discussion with Professor Charles Ramírez Berg: El Mariachi (Robert Rodriguez, 1992) Shohat and Stam, Stereotype, Realism, and the Struggle Over Representation in Critical Visions (800 822) López, Are All Latins From Manhattan? in Critical Visions (859 871) hooks, The Oppositional Gaze: Black Female Spectators [Blackboard]
FDM 5376 Contemporary Film Theory Syllabus page 8 Week 13 (Nov. 21 22): Student Paper Presentations No Wednesday Screening Critical Theory paper presentations on Thursday Week 14 (Nov. 28 29) No screening or class Happy Thanksgiving! Week 15 (Dec. 4 5): Student Paper Presentations continued No Wednesday Screening Critical Theory paper presentations on Thursday Critical Theory Paper due to me in my office Monday, December 9 by 5:00 p.m.
FDM 5376 Contemporary Film Theory Syllabus page 9 Screening List Aug. 28 Vertigo Alfred Hitchcock 1958 128 min. Sept. 4 In the Mood for Love Wong Kar-Wai 2000 98 min. Sept. 11 Letter Never Sent Mikhail Kalatozov 1959 96 min. Sept. 18 Amour Michael Haneke 2012 124 min. Sept. 25 Peeping Tom Michael Powell 1960 101 min. Oct. 2 2 or 3 Things I Know About Her Jean-Luc Godard 1967 87 min. Oct. 9 The Silence of the Lambs Jonathan Demme 1991 118 min. Oct. 16 No screening Oct. 23 A.I. Artificial Intelligence Steven Spielberg 2001 146 min. Oct. 31 King Kong Peter Jackson 2005 187 min. Nov. 7 Sin City Frank Miller & 2005 124 min. Robert Rodriguez Nov. 14 El Mariachi Robert Rodriguez 1992 81 min. Nov. 21 Nov. 27 Dec. 4 No screening Paper presentations No screening Happy Thanksgiving! No screening Paper presentations
FDM 5376 Contemporary Film Theory Syllabus page 10 Course Readings on Blackboard Allen, Michael. The Impact of Digital Technologies on Film Aesthetics. The New Media Book, ed. Dan Harris. London: BFI Publishing, 2002.109 119. Andrew, J. Dudley. The Three Ages of Cinema Studies and the Age to Come. PMLA 115, no. 3 (May 2000): 341 351. Baudrillard, Jean. The Precession of Simulacra. Simulacra and Simulation, trans. Sheila Faria Galser. Ann Arbor: U of Michigan P, 1994. 1 42. Baudry, Jean Louis. Ideological Effects of the Basic Cinematographic Apparatus. Narrative, Apparatus, Ideology: A Film Reader, ed. Phil Rosen. New York: Columbia UP, 1986. 286 298. Freeland, Cynthia A. Feminist Frameworks for Horror Films. Post-Theory: Reconstructing Film Studies, eds. David Bordwell and Noel Carroll. Madison: U of Wisconsin P, 1996. Friedberg, Ann. A Denial of Difference: Theories of Cinematic Identification. Psychoanalysis & Cinema, ed. E. Ann Kaplan. New York: Routledge, 1990. 36 45. Hall, Stuart. The Problem of Ideology: Marxism Without Guarantees. Stuart Hall: Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies, ed. David Morley and Kuan-Hsing Chen. New York: Routledge, 1996. 25 46. hooks, bell. The Oppositional Gaze: Black Female Spectators. Black Looks: Race and Representation. Boston: South End Press, 1992. 115 131. Huyssen, Andreas. Mapping the Postmodern. New German Critique no. 33 (Autumn 1984): 5 52. Jenkins, Henry. The Work of Theory in the Age of Digital Transformations. A Companion to Film Theory, eds. Toby Miller & Robert Stam. London: Blackwell, 2004. 234 261. Mulvey, Laura. Afterthoughts on Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema Inspired by Duel in the Sun. Psychoanalysis and Cinema, ed. E. Ann Kaplan. New York: Routledge, 1990. 24 33. Niessen, Niels. Lives of Cinema: Against Its Death. Screen 52, no. 3 (Autumn 2011): 307 326. Ravetto-Biagioli, Kriss. Vertigo and the Vertiginous History of Film Theory. Camera Obscure 25, no. 3 (2011): 101 140. Rodowick, D. N. Part I: The Virtual Life of Film. The Virtual Life of Film. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2007. 1 22. Whissel, Kristen. Tales of Upward Mobility: The New Verticality and Digital Special Effects. Film Quarterly 59.4 (June 2006): 23 24.