Holga Photos at Battleground Park

Today my sister gave me her Diana F+ camera and it reminded me of these photos my husband and I took with our Holga before we left for Vermont. She also gave me a book printed by Lomography that included many pictures taken with the Diana. It made me want to got the beach to take pictures. Or maybe I just want to get out of Greensboro, if only for awhile.

It is the first week back to school for everyone here it seems; the public school and the colleges/universities. A few weeks back it was odd to not be preparing syllabi and thinking about new ideas for my classes. Now I miss my students and that first week back when every one is coming to see you and explaining how the summers flew by. The college I worked out was very small and I am very close to the students. So not only do I miss that beginning of the school year feeling, but I miss my students!

Flip'n Friday: Natashia

Natashia from Chelsea Wayant on Vimeo.


This week for Flip'n Friday I have posted a piece featuring one of my students, Natashia (check out one of her films here).  She has a confidence and strong sense of identity that is so hard to find among girls/women. So often females put all of their self worth into a boyfriend/husband/child; sometimes it is important to think about ourselves as well. Natashia has always impressed me with how strong her convictions are and her resolve to stand by them. We can all take a cue from her (though we can still believe in marriage if we so choose).

For those of you that are new to this blog every Friday I post a video for the week. Normally, I shoot the pieces with a simple Flip Camera, but every now and then I will use my Canon or edit footage from one of my films into a trailer or whatnot. It just depends on the week. You can see all the Flip'n Friday here (or just check out this and this, two of my favorites).

Monday Film Class: The Great Cinema Myth

The first films ever projected were a collection of shorts by the Lumiere Brothers. Edison and the Lumiere's have a long running feud over who actually made the first film. I've heard arguments for both sides and personally I don't think it really matters. I call it a tie; though I do like to give the Lumiere's a slight edge just because it seems as though Edison tended to steal many ideas and inventions.

The Lumiere Brothers camera was amazing in that it was not only the camera, but also the projector. The simplicity of early cameras is amazing to me because you realize that all of the equipment that we burden ourselves with as filmmakers sometimes can get in the way of the idea. All you really need is a box, a lense, the sun, and a strip of celluloid (well, maybe an actor too). 

Legend goes that The Train Arriving at the Station was one of the first films shown the night of the Lumiere's screening and that the audience ran out of the theater screaming. Apparently, they thought the train was coming at them and would run them over. If you watch the film below, the train is not coming right at you, but steaming off at an angle. Audiences back in 1895 would have been extremely dumb to have run out of the theater after watching this film, do you not agree?

Research has shown that the audience did not run out screaming and if they did it was  a stunt to drum up publicity. I think as students it is important to consider this legend because its endurance relies on contemporary audiences looking at audiences of the past as somehow inferior. Simply because a film is old does not make it less important, less artistic, or less worthwhile. Perhaps it makes us feel better to look back at past audiences and think we are so much more intelligent. When in fact we are just interested in different things at different times.

When watching a Lumiere film it is important to still think about all the same elements as with other films. Why did they put the camera where they put it? How does it influence our viewing of the film? Why did they choose this subject? Early films are incredibly short so you can get in a significant amount of viewing in a fairly short time. All the films are in the public domain due to their age and are fairly easy to find on youtube.

Ironically, The Train Arriving at the Station was probably not even played on that first film screening back in 1895.

Monday Film Class: Nicole Holofcener

Last Thursday my sister watched my daughter so that my husband and I could go see the new Nicole Holofcener film, Please Give. After watching the trailer we had considered seeing the film for our anniversary last month, but decided against it because it was only playing in Winston-Salem and I preferred to stay in Greensboro. This week I though I would write about Holofcener both to recommend seeing the film in theater, projected on film of course, and to introduce a filmmaker that you may not be familiar.

{source}

Holofcener is a writer/director whom often makes films revolving around females and the issues facing them. She is does this in a very honest manner without overtly glamorizing women akin to Sex and the City type fare.

Interestingly, Catherine Keener has played a major role in all four of Holofcener’s feature length films. It makes one wonder if the characters Keener plays are surrogates for Holofcener. When a director writes characters that are similar to themselves I often refer to them as the director’s Antoinel Doinel. Doinel is the main character in a series of films by Francois Truffaut that begins with the 400 Blows, which is a semi-autobiographical film about Truffaut’s childhood. As the series progresses and Doinel ages the character becomes more of an amalgamation of the Jean-Pierre Leaud (the actor portraying Doinel) and Truffaut himself. Of course Truffaut is not the only one to have done this nor the first, but it is very successful pairing that extended over many films. Now, I don’t know for sure that Holofcener uses herself as the blueprint for Keener’s characters, but it is something I have always wondered. Though Keener’s characters are not carbon copies of each other they all have a similar make up involving a somewhat neurotic and needy nature.

Today I have had a hard time sitting down at the computer to a write this post and am now in the eleventh hour. All day I have been trying to think about why Holofcener is a relevant director. It is not often that films portray women in the central roles in a film and it is even rarer that films with lead female characters are not romantic comedies (where the women are usually portrayed as searching for or needing a man in their lives).  Holofcener is one of the rare directors making films about women without relying on stereotypes or using female characters to sell designer shoes. She does this by creating very personal films that are far from the normal high concept big budget Hollywood fare. She allows the women to have real flaws and dimension.

Upon leaving the theater I thought Please Give was good, but not as well executed as some of Holofcener’s other films, but now I am not sure, the more I think about the film the more I appreciate it. That’s the thing with her films there is never a pat, easy ending, nothing is force fed. The character’s were all incredibly well written. My husband really loves the grandmother and thought she was a particular stand out. I agree with him, but I was also impressed with Amanda Peet, she plays a bitch very well.

I show Holofcener’s Lovely and Amazing in my Women and Film class and students are often very divided on the film. Often they want a concrete conclusion and feel as though the film just ends. This semester, due to some films being misplaced during a move to a new building, I showed the film much earlier than normal. At first the film had some of the same complaints, but as the semester moved along it became the film that everyone referenced and compared subsequent films.

Flip'n Friday: Conchetta Davis

 Conchetta Davis, Blind Photographer from Chelsea Wayant on Vimeo.

This week my student (though she did graduate in May) was featured in her very first art show. She wants to be a photographer/filmmaker and was inspired by the classes she took with me. It was very exciting to be at her very first show.

For this installment of Flip'n Friday I decided to make a portrait of Conchetta. Unfortunately I did not have my tripod with me and I had to hold my daughter while shooting (otherwise she would have demonstrated her newly learned skill: running). Regardless, I think I kept a fairly steady hand, as long as we weren't laughing!

The Cool Down

We have finally had some rain, which cooled down our high 90s weather. Thank goodness. Today I am hoping to make it downtown to visit one of my students art exhibits. My daughter is fast asleep so we will leave whenever she wakes up.

It gives me the time to listen to some of Tift Merritt's radio show The Spark (check out the archive, pretty impressive roster). She has a great interview with Darren Jessee, whom is a wonderful musician and person. He has great comments on the creative process. I met him once, years ago, when I was working at a coffee shop in Chapel Hill. He came in a lot and I never saw him only heard about from the other barista. It was a hot day when he came in and I had the door open and I had my back to the door. I turned around and he was just standing there, at the register, and I almost lost my balance and sputtered out, "Darren Jessee..." He smiled and I gave him his coffee. I was so embarrassed, but he was nice about it.

My film Drowning Slowly is named after a Ben Folds Five Song and it closes with a Hotel Lights song. Darren Jessee was the most famous person we approached about using a song and he was the most awesome about it and didn't try to fleece us for money (that we did not have, we made the movie for $3000). So check out the interview and his two albums: Hotel Lights and Firecracker People.

Monday Film Class: Last Year at Marienbad

I finally watched (or rewatched, the first viewing being in 1996) Last Year at Marienbad. Before I discuss the film itself let me give some background. The director, Alain Resnais, is associated with the French New Wave movement or La Nouvelle Vague. Of course the most prominent members of this movement are Jean-Luc Godard and Francois Truffaut. For those making a list of important films to watch you must include The 400 Blows (Truffaut) and Breathless (Godard). They are the truly defining films of this movement and The 400 Blows in particular is one of my favorite films. The French New Wave is truly independent filmmaking at its finest. Beyond that, though, the filmmakers were attempting to wake up cinema audiences. They were not concerned with allowing an audience suspend their disbelief and forget that they were watching a movie. Instead, they wanted the audience to always be aware that they are watching a constructed reality, a piece of art. 
 

        {Godard, Source}                                  {Truffaut, Source}

For instance they often use tracking shots that are way too long and make an audience uncomfortable or using a freeze frame at the end of the film so that all movement ceases and often the main character captured in a defining moment (of course now this technique is often used in a rather banal manner making it rather cliche). This was first used in The 400 Blows as a means to trap the main character and reflect on how he is caged and has nowhere left to go, thus using a cinematic technique to comment directly on a character. Godard used jump cuts (when a piece of the action is missing from a continuous shot making the image appear to jerk or jump) as a way to shorten his film, but it was also a means to constantly remind viewers that they were watching a film and had not been carried away to some other world. They are not a fly on someones wall, but instead a patron sitting in a theater.


The French New Wave is such a wonderful and influential period of filmmaking and I can only begin to touch on it here. Even though now  many of the techniques that they used in their films can be considered somewhat mainstream, the thought behind the technique has often been lost. When you go back and watch these films you can see what they were trying to accomplish more clearly. At times it can be uncomfortable to watch (not violent or sexual, but more 'what in the world is going on?'), but stick with the films and you will be rewarded. 

{source}

Now onto Last Year at Marienbad. Resnais is considered to be in a subset of the French New Wave often referred to as the Left Bank. These filmmakers, which also includes Chris Marker (La Jetee) and Agnes Varda (Cleo From 5 to 7), were the more artsy fringe of the movement. Though the French New Wave as a whole was interested in challenging tradition in cinema the left bank really pushed the envelope. While Godard and Truffaut were film critics taking the leap into filmmaking somewhat as a way to test their theories, the Left Bank contingency was made up more of artists. Their films sometimes even veered into experimental filmmaking.

To use a contemporary comparison trying to make sense of the plot or structure of Last Year at Marienbad is like trying to make sense of the television series Lost; when it comes down to it structural clarity is not necessarily the point. And believe me Lost is a cakewalk compared to Marienbad. Resnais is particularly interested in memory and his most famous films (Night and Fog, Hiroshima Mon Amour, Marienbad) explore the manner in which we store our most heinous memories be they personal or collective. For instance Night and Fog tackles The Holocaust and if land can maintain memory. Resnais brings his camera to concentration camps a decade after they were liberated and juxtaposes the modern footage with archival footage of the camps, thus taking leaps from the present to the past and back again. I first watched this film in 8th grade and the images, the sound of the narrator, were burned into my own memory. The two images that stayed with me most vibrantly was one of bodies being bulldozed (a painful image, but necessary)  and one of the modern grown over fence cutting through a green landscape.

{source}

Last Year at Marienbad looks at tragedy on a more personal level. The main character is trying to either rationalize his role in a rape and possible murder or his complicity in the murder of a woman with which he was/is in love. Depending on your interpretation perhaps there was not even a murder, perhaps the woman escaped with the love of her life at her side. Perhaps everyone is dead, portrayed only as a memory. Often Resnais jumps from one location to another, one moment in time to another during what appears to be one simultaneous conversation/thought. So the past and the present become blurred.


It is easy to write off Marienbad as weird and unfocused because it demands so much from its viewers. This is not an easy, popcorn film. All of the characters walk through the film in a daze, with little emotion to guide the viewer. Plot points and characters, who are never even named, are vague and barely developed. When watching the film you shouldn't try to make sense of it all, but experience it. Whatever you think is happening, is happening in some way,  allow your mind to fill in the spaces. There is not a right or wrong in this film.


This may be a hard film to watch, but it will stay with you as you ponder what it all means. You will benefit from multiple viewings, don't be scared to watch it twice. Sometimes when I watch films like this I get put into this dreamy, half asleep state that allows me to follow the film even better (and sometimes I fall asleep). If you have never watched a French New Wave film (or an experimental film) before I would advise watching some of the more accessible ones first before Last Year at Marienbad. 

If you give the film a chance you can really begin to think about memory and how we alter it to fit our perceptions of ourselves, our lives. Often if our memories were exact interpretations of what really happened perhaps we would not be able to exist in the world. Our actions would be to hard for us to bear. 

Mojitos for a Hot Day

Today the thermometer is threatening triple digits. It's making me want to make these mojitos again to help cool down.

Yesterday, I found out today that one of my students, who graduated in May, was accepted into graduate film school. Check out some of her work here, here and here. I make a cameo in the latter, Bills, Bills, Bills video; see if you can pick me out. It is also my daughter's all time favorite music video and it really is an excellent, fun to watch piece.

Beginning Filmmaking

Editing Rain last Thursday made me think of my beginning filmmaking professor, Mrs. Robinson, yes, that was really her name. Since we were all film students we of course (more specifically the boys in class, so all the students except me) were super sensitive to calling out her name, there was a lot of, "umm, uhh, Mrs, umm, Robinson..."

The class focused entirely on experimental filmmaking (check out this, this, and this) and by the end of the class I was worried I had made a huge mistake in choosing my life's path. For my final film I was "adapting" a Jim Morrison poem and I had created a slight narrative path. Narrative films often rely on certain shots to tell the story; imagine The Graduate without Ben and Elaine on the bus at the end. Whole different movie.

Anyway, one or two reels of the film did not turn out and needless to say they contained the most important shots. I went to Mrs. Robinson, near tears, imploring to her that I could not make my film. She asked me if some reels turned out, I nodded. She told me I had a film, it wasn't exactly what I planned, but to remember the films make themselves and not the other way around. So I went back looked at the footage again (and again) until I found the film.

Often I think about this even when I'm not making a film because life is never cut and dry either. The best laid plans...

When I projected my film for the class, still not confident, it didn't help that Mrs. Robinson kept taking her glasses off and rubbing her eyes. I thought she was falling asleep. It turns out she was crying, she even needed a moment when the film was over to compose herself. It was amazing to know I had touched someone so deeply.

My last year of college I wasn't handling criticism well in a video production class and lamented to a fellow student. In disbelief he looked at me and said, "Didn't you make Mrs. Robinson cry? Not many filmmakers can say that."

Monday Film Class: It's Complicated

Alright so this is more like a year in review post and won't necessarily include films you have to add to your must watch list, though I would recommend it. Last year was a really good year for women filmmakers not even including the obvious. Almost all of the top women film directors released a film: Kathryn Bigelow (Hurt Locker), Jane Campion (Bright Star), Nora Ephron (Julie and Julia), Mira Nair (Amelia), and Nancy Meyers (It's Complicated). Even though there are more and more women directors cropping up these five have been around for awhile and are trailblazers. It's almost overwhelming that they all had films come out last year.

Kathryn Bigelow {Source}

Jane Campion {source}

This weekend I finally watched It's Complicated, and now the only one I haven't seen is Amelia. I'm dragging my feet because I am not a huge Hilary Swank fan something about her really rubs me the wrong way for some reason and more than likely she will be in every scene of the film.

My favorite of all the films is, hands down, Bright Star, it is a beautiful and breathtaking film. It even has Paul Schneider in it who is one of my favorite actors and is also from Asheville, NC, where my husband grew up. It is shocking to me that both Campion and Bigelow were not nominated for best director at the Oscars last year, they both deserved the nominations. I guess film's biggest night is not quite ready enough to give up two seats to women behind the camera. While I can appreciate Hurt Locker, Kathryn Bigelow tends toward films that are a little too intense for me. I also really like a film with a female lead particularly a female who bucks tradition.

 Nancy Meyers {Source}

Thus, bringing me to It's Complicated, which I finally watched this weekend. Since the arrival of the little baby girl into our lives we are not able to make it to the movies as often as we used to go. We're starting to get better about this arranging for a babysitter thing (i.e. my sister or my grandmother), but we're still a little limited. Thank goodness for Netflix. Nothing really substitutes for watching in a theater with the film projected on film (with digital projection I might as well stay at home). Yet, Netflix is a good, yet, distant second. For some reason I don't seem to want to talk about the movie...

Perhaps, because I didn't love it, and I really wanted to love it. My husband really wanted to love it as well, no luck there either. To begin with it felt too long. All the pieces were there they just needed to be rearranged. Meryl Streep was wonderful, but really, when is she not? Notice that she was in two of the above mentioned films, hmmm. Though the scenes with all "the girlfriends" did not ring true to me; they just laughed a lot and were giddy or something. Those scenes were really hard for me to watch. I think that Streep could have done more with the character she was a little one dimensional. She is used to being perfect and gets stomped on and then she breaks the rules and does the stomping. Streep could easily handle more complexity in a character so go ahead and give it to her. There was not enough of Steve Martin he wasn't allowed to really shine. His character was too perfect, too easy. He should have come up earlier it let's Streep off the hook because she ends it with Baldwin before she really starts dating him. The characters need to be allowed to have flaws (besides Baldwin, though somehow his flaw seems not to be a flaw because he is eschewing his young skinny wife for the older ex wife, how noble of him).

Actually, Meyers' last film The Holiday was a little long to me as well, but had a lot of heart and some really wonderful moments.  Some fell flat like Cameron Diaz crying at the end, a little over the top if you ask me. I love when Kate Winslet experiences the Santa Ana winds I almost feel them myself every time I watch the film.

Of course, there is always the chance that my expectations were to high and when I see it again with low expectations I'll appreciate it more. I hate it when I have to say that about a movie with a good movie hopefully expectations wouldn't matter. Though you should still watch it and tell me what you think. Plus, I do love the trailer.

Alright, so next week, Last Year at Marienbad, I promise. Hopefully, I'll be a little more positive. Though, I wasn't all that impressed with the film when I was in undergrad, but now that I've aged a little I thought I'd give it a another go. It just may have been the first French film I ever watched (other than The Red Balloon when I was young).

Thoughts on Summer

This weekend we had to cut our time outside short because it was so unbearably hot. It seems as though summer started about two weeks ago instead of just yesterday. On Sunday they had a summer solstice celebration in the afternoon at the arboretum. We usually love going there and all of the above pictures were taken during walks at the arboretum, but it was way to hot to join in the celebration, for us at least. My husband remembered the event from last year and said there would be fairies running all around since I didn't believe him we did a drive by to see the fairies and check out the festivities (on the off chance it was worth leaving the air conditioning). It just looked hot to us. There was no shade and I saw no fairies. Later that night the local news confirmed the fairies, but with no good footage so I am still slightly skeptical. I think it was too hot for fairies as well.

Lately, may days are starting to follow a routine. It relies a lot on my daughter keeping her nap schedule, but for the most part I have been able to write and/or edit video in the mornings and late afternoons. She is currently napping though I am hearing some noise on the monitor so we will see how long this lasts. This week I am a little nervous because one of my students is waiting to hear back from graduate school. She and I have been working together a lot this summer to make her application really stand out. This weekend she had a phone interview and it sounded like it went really well and now we are just waiting on pins and needles. Hopefully, she will hear this week. If she doesn't get in to this school at least we have finished all her materials and she can apply to others. She is a very talented student and I believe whichever school she decides to attend will be lucky to have her. It is amazing how invested you get in your students and how proud you are of them as they venture out into the world. Ironically, I have another student who just finished her first year of graduate school and sent me her first year film project and it is strikingly similar to my first graduate film (sort of the first film, but that's a whole other post). She has never seen my film, which makes the parallel that much more striking. I know that I am not as proud of them as their parents are, but I consider myself to be next in line!

My daughter will be waking soon and wanting me to read the same book over and over again to her and I'm hoping to unload the dishwasher before she rises. So I am off. Hopefully, it will cool down enough today to take a late afternoon walk.

Monday Film Class: What Remains

To truly be a great filmmaker or even a decent one I believe you really need to know other filmmakers particularly, but not limited to, those that came before you. To amend that perhaps to be an artist you need to study the world that exists beyond you. There are filmmakers that can pick up a book, learn the rules and make a decent film, but those are rarely artists. Now, seeing as this is my mantra, I have been a very bad artist/filmmaker because I am not watching enough films. Yes, Last Year at Marienbad is still in the Netflix sleeve sitting in the same spot. To be fair I did watch another film (it was even French), but I didn't really like it and (gasp) couldn't finish it. I would have forced myself, but my husband wants some new Netflix and we sent it back.

{source}

So this Monday I'm not quite sure what to write about, but all week I have been thinking about the documentary What Remains. Now, Courtney and Tashia the students who inspired me to hold this somewhat abbreviated unfocused psuedo-class have already seen this film, but I think they may need to be reminded of its brilliance.

What Remains has been on my mind because of the documentary proposal I am currently writing. More often than not it seems viewers (or what at times seems more relevant, festivals) want documentaries to be social issue based. They love when a documentary inspires change and a viewer says, "I watched this documentary and it made me want to go out and change the world." Often social issue documentaries are not always well crafted pieces of filmmaking because just getting the shot is more important than getting a well composed beautiful shot; and rightly so. Also, more often than not the filmmakers are not filmmakers and have not studied the craft in a meaningful way before diving in. But, why do these films have to be the dominant form in the documentary field? Sometimes it feels that all other films are subcategories and that documentaries somehow have to change the world or they are a lesser form.

For the moment let's look at films involving musicians. Not the ones that are looking back at a legend's lifetime of work, but those that document the artist in their prime, often performing. More often than not these are given the subcategory: concert film. To me this implies I am just watching an artist perform a concert usually at just one locale. I have no problem with these, I think they are great and are particularly great to play at parties because the television becomes more than a box in the corner and visitors who need to rest or a break from the action have a place to chill out and still be entertained. My issue with this category is that often any film about a musician (that is not historical) becomes a concert film simply because they often (as is needed) include scenes of an artist performing.

A film that gets placed into this subcategory at times is D.A. Pennebaker's Don't Look Back. I consider this film (and it was presented to me in this manner in film school) to be a cornerstone of cinema verite filmmaking. When I show it to my students it shouldn't matter whether or not they like Dylan, more often than not they don't even know who he is, but that they need to pay attention to the form. The ones who can get passed the "ancient, boring, music" (and even some that don't) take a lot away from the film. Even the students interested in narrative filmmaking will reference this film in their pitches and proposals. So often now Don't Look Back seems to be relegated to a concert film (though there is not a full concert or even the appearance of one) or a music documentary. By categorizing it in this way it seems to be less of a documentary, less important, because it is about music.

Though it seems that I have digressed somewhat let's look at how this all ties back to Sally Mann and What Remains. Sally Mann first rose to prominence with a series of photographs documenting her children when they were young. The children were often naked and this caused a stir. Child pornography is obviously a big social issue and so this documentary, on the surface could be sold as such, as is Sally Mann's work. Mann's art is much more than simply a controversy; it is beautiful, poignant, and thought provoking. What Remains is a documentary about an artist, Mann is a part of every scene, every moment. She has moved away from the portraits of her children, they have grown up.

The documentary is beautifully photographed and thoughtfully edited. It ends where it starts with Mann alone in her studio photographing herself. We look in to her eyes as she stares into the lens of her own camera. This documentary will not make you want to change the world, but it is one of the best documentaries I have ever seen. It often has a profound effect on the students who view it and always for different reasons. The same goes for me, depending on what I am doing this film will inspire me for different reasons. Now I am thinking about it because the documentary I want to make is also about artists (dancers, specifically ballerinas) and it feels as though no one will be interested in it because it is not in regards to some awful travesty. Nowadays that seems to be what documentary has become. Case in point; What Remains. Before Stephen Cantor, the film's director, made What Remains he made a short documentary about Sally Mann focused entirely on the child pornography accusations. The short film, Blood Ties, was nominated for an Oscar, and What Remains was not. I think What Remains is brilliant, but Blood Ties not so much. It is a very basic documentary with classic interview set-ups, b-roll, and expert opinion. Sally Mann is a little guarded in it, whereas she is very open and honest in the latter film. If you look at the Oscars in general it always seems to be the topic that is nominated and not the film. A very interesting subject holds up a not so interesting or well done film. I think this has its place in the documentary form, but why must it dominate the documentary form? Why must all other documentaries play second fiddle to a social interest.

No offense, but just because some knucklehead lived next door to a serial killer and he happened to pick up a DV camera and shoot a bunch of shaky DV footage, throws in some fairly well shot interviews with experts, gives that to a professional editor (most often the case) or edits it on the cheapest most common video editing software (selling point for the software company) a great film is very rarely made. This is an example of not a film but an amazing story to print in a festival program. This would never fly in the narrative filmmaking world. Alright, alright, my bitter filmmaker side is revealing itself. A little venting is what a blog is for though (just maybe not film class; that's why this is a pseudo film class).

I just wish there was something controversial about ballerinas, other than eating disorders; I need a Gelsey Kirkland. I don't want the controversy to be the film, I just know the controversial will make people watch it.  Any ideas?

Monday Film Class: Buster and Charlie, Charlie and Buster

I full intended to re-watch and subsequently discuss Last Year at Marienbad, but unfortunately it is still sitting on the television. This week I haven't watched any movies though I have watched almost the entire second season of Party Down with my husband. Hopefully I will be back on track next weekend.

My recommendations for this week go back to the silent era. By watching silent films you can really learn everything you need to know about filmmaking. All of our visual cinematic language was truly created from about 1895-1927. It's often said, and I agree, that sound stunted the growth of cinema as an art form and if silent films extended their heydays by a decade the visual language of film would be exceedingly strong. Silent films are often even harder for students than foreign films. I can attest to this, when I was in college my film history class was a two semester sequence and the entire first semester was 1895-1927. We watched all the films on silent speed with no musical accompaniment. In reality silent films where not silent at all they always had at least a piano player and at times an orchestra. During the semester I thought it was torturous, but once you become accustomed to viewing silent films they are easier to digest and are very enjoyable.

The best place to start to ease your way into the silents is with the comics. Buster Keaton and Charles Chaplin are not only funny, but also superior filmmakers. They are also both extremely different. Buster Keaton does almost unbelievable stunts particularly considering this was before any safety measures. He also uses a lot of trick photography and symmetrical composition. His films are well planned out. Keaton is the master of the deadpan and relies more on the structure of his films than an emotional punch. Often Keaton is challenged by seemingly unbeatable odds; it's not one cop, but hundreds.

Chaplin, on the other hand, packs on emotional wallop. I don't think there is any film made before or after that matches the emotion at the end of The Kid. A while back there was a Bank of America Commercial (or some similar company) that used just the end of the film when Chaplin is racing across the city roofs to rescue his adopted child and I was tearing up. I didn't even have to see little Jackie Coogan. In his work Chaplin relies heavily on his supporting actors and would burn through magazines of film allowing for improvisation. He did not really script out his stories at length. He is most famous for developing the character of the "little tramp." The sweet, lovable, down on his luck clown has become iconic.

Pretty much any film you can pick up directed by one of these masters will be an experience. Be sure that they directed the film and are not simply featured. For Keaton I highly recommend Cops, Sherlock Jr., The General, and Steamboat Bill, Jr. For Chaplin: The Immigrant, The Kid, The Gold Rush, Modern Times and City Lights.  These are not exhaustive lists by any means, but I don't want to overwhelm anyone with silents. In my experience most students are wary of the silents, but Chaplin and Keaton helps to reduce their fears. Often students prefer one or the other and become very defensive of their chosen director. It is always a good class for me when a student who was vehemently opposed to watching silent films at the beginning of the semester sits in class arguing for Buster Keaton's composition and visual impact with another student who prefers the emotion of Chaplin.

Monday Film Class

 The thing about leaving a college is that when you leave there are still three years worth of students who know who you are and want you to stay. We are a small school, which makes it even worse. Those having the toughest time seem to be the juniors, particularly the ones that were my advisees. Two in particular, Courtney and Tashia, are talented filmmakers and want to keep taking classes. Courtney constantly asks me for a list of films for her to watch so that she can continue her studies. So here is a better solution (I hope) than just a list.

Every Monday I will discuss a film that I am currently watching, is a favorite of mine, or one that I believe is a need to watch. At times I may discuss a director instead of a film or maybe even a year (1939 was a particularly good one). There are so many films out there that are worthwhile both historically, artistically, and as legends. I have not even seen everything that I "should" see and, trust me, I've seen a lot of films.

After over a decade of a study in the field I have come to realize that there are two films that if you have not seen them and were to delve into a conversation with a serious cinephile you would be at a lost. Now these two films need to be watched alongside plenty of other films that cover all the decades; keeping in mind that the first film screened in 1895, not 1985. The films from the 1890s are very important and luckily they are short and sweet! But, on to the films for today, this first one should be obvious...

Citizen Kane (Welles 1941)

Surprise! Yes, you need to watch Citizen Kane. In a way it is like telling an art student they should really see the Sistine Chapel. You don't need to be told. Regardless, I'm starting at the beginning here. This is also an unranked look at two films. I am in no way saying I think Citizen Kane is the best film ever (for the record I don't believe that), I'm just saying you need to watch it to understand the scope of cinema. Kane is important for any number of reasons the big one that you will hear over and over again is: deep focus. Welles and his cinematographer, Gregg Toland, were very innovative in using the whole frame to visually tell the story even the background. Watch for the scene when a young Charles plays outside in the snow while his mother makes a deal regarding his life inside their house.

When first watching films it can be hard to understand how a story is told visually and when a story is not being told visually because film is a visual medium. This film should help you to see what can be done visually and why your favorite film last year may not have been nominated for an Oscar. Welles uses every shot in the film to say something about a character or to move the story.

On the Waterfront (Kazan 1954)

I watched On the Waterfront in more classes in college than Citizen Kane and I have undoubtedly shown it more often in classes that I have taught. It couldn't be more different, at least when looking at Hollywood movies, than Citizen Kane. While Kane is an epic visual powerhouse Waterfront is more personal with extensive location shooting. The acting plays the pivotal role in this film and the camera work often plays second fiddle. For instance in the famous white glove sequence where Marlon Brando improvised his actions after Eva Marie Saint dropped her glove. Kazan allowed the camera to continue to roll as Brando began to fiddle with the glove and put it on his hand. The symbolism is strong due to her innocent white glove and the action of him putting it on his hand. His guilt in the involvement of her brother's murder is in question and by taking her glove it can be seen to foreshadow his later actions.

Even though Kazan allowed his actors the freedom to improvise his film still has plenty of visual interest for instance when we see Charlie is revealed in the alley. Another interesting aspect of this film is that it can be read as Elia Kazan's explanation for his testimony at the HUAC trials where he named names. He had held out naming names for awhile and he never gave a clear explanation as to why he suddenly changed his mind and named names. All of the characters in the film can be substituted for various players in the HUAC trials notably with the Brando character representing Kazan.

Notice that both films are in black and white. It's important to not be scared of black and white; it's beautiful. Particularly in films before 1970 when the cinematographers really knew what they were doing when creating images with light and shadows. During my Introduction to Film class at the University of Colorado I overheard two girls planning on skipping out on the film because they couldn't handle all the black and white films they were being forced to watch. They did not understand why they couldn't watch recent movies. Of course, me being the film student snob I was, rolled my eyes and thought to myself, "Why are you even taking this class?" Counting films out just because they are not in color is a huge mistake some of the most amazing films were filmed in black and white. In fact if I were to add a third film to this list it would also be in black and white: Casablanca. Ironically, I believe the film they skipped out on was Last Year at Marienbad, which I just received from Netflix last week.