SPOILER ALERT: Black Swan

Black Swan, a movie recently released by Darren Aronofsky, is a perfect example of Hollywood's 3-act structure. In the first act, the main conflict is whether or not the protagonist, Nina, played by Natalie Portman, will be awarded the role of the Swan Queen. The risk continues to increase, right up until the casting list is announced and she receives the part. This happen at just about 30 minutes into the film, just as is expected. In the next act, Nina begins to develop into her roles as both the Black and White Swan. The climax of this act is when she lets herself go for a night and completely releases her need for perfection. Complete with drinks, drugs, partying, dancing (and much more), the crazy night out finalizes her surrender to the Black Swan (her dark side). This occurs about 75 minutes into the film; right on target between 60 and 90. The third act encompasses the actual performance of Swan Lake. As the risk builds to the greatest point of the film, things begin to become crazier and more twisted. Nina goes through a period of psychological turmoil during the performance of the ballet. The final climax of the entire movie occurs about 98 minutes into the 103 minute film. This is at the end of the ballet when the Swan Queen kills herself. At that final climactic moment, the true reality is revealed and her dying words end the movie on a "perfect" note.

TV on the...TV

In his lecture on TV, Colin Tait discussed TV as a self-reflexive and post modern medium. The post modern aspect of TV goes hand in hand with it’s self-reflexivity. Post modernity (in reference to television) is how often TV realizes what it’s doing when it references other current events or forms of media. Self-reflexivity is simply when TV is on TV. Often the family or group of people in any given TV show has at least some encounter with television. For instance, Tait gave the example of The Simpsons opening sequence, which is basically this family all trying to get home in time to turn on the TV. Now I’m not an avid Simpsons viewer, but one show that I do watch regularly is Community. Community is an NBC sitcom about a group of students at a community college. It is also often delightfully tongue in cheek. In addition to being a semi-realistic comedy about life at community college, it is also a perfect example of post modern TV and it’s self-reflexivity. In every episode, there is some reference to another show, form of media, or even it’s own plot and character development. One of my favorite characters, Abed, is a perfect example of post modern TV. Abed is an aspiring film student and he views his whole life as a movie. Which comes across to the audience as beautifully ironic, because we are watching his life as a TV show. Often he’ll say things like, “This is the part of the show where the principal busts down the door and yells ‘What are y’all doing?!’” The scene that he describes then proceeds to play out just as he describes. Scenes like this, examples of TV’s post modern aspects and it’s self-reflexivity, are one of the things that I still find entertainment in. I love being in on the joke and this is one way TV allows us to do just that.

(500) Days of Summer

In this unique scene from (500) days of summer, the protagonist, Tom, plays out his dream of what the night would be like ("Expectations") vs. the actual night ("Reality"). The first shot is an example of two camera angles Ramirez-Berg discussed, the close up (on the left) and the medium shot (on the right). In contrasting these two shots in one picture, the filmmaker is showing us the two different situations: the emotional bond between Tom and the girl, Summer, on the left, and the purely informational shot on the right, which lets the audience know that there isn't an emotional connection between these two characters here.

Later on in this scene, Tom's "Expectations" are shattered. The camera pans to a close up his face and then cuts to this close up. This shot of Summer's hand with an engagement ring on it lets the audience know why Tom is so disturbed. Rather than the emotional connotative meaning of the close up previously described, this close up is a denotative shot, giving us important details.

After his "Expectations" are no more, Tom runs down the stairs and outside. He is all alone and as he walks away from the camera, he places himself in a long shot, which lets the audience know that he is lonely, sad, and isolated.

Studio System - Genre

One aspect of the Hollywood studio system that I found particularly interesting is the fact that certain studios focused on specific genres. Universal focused on Horrors, Warner Brothers focused on Crime films, which eventually developed into Detective films, and MGM focused on Musicals. This focus on genres led people to expect certain things when going to see movies made by certain studios. It also provided studios an opportunity to concentrate all their efforts on a certain genre, so that they could make the best possible film of that genre at that time. Rather than spreading themselves thin and trying to perfect several different genres, they could focus all their energies in one place. An example of a film in this company-controlled genre would be MGM's musical, Singing in the Rain. Starring MGM's top dancing star, Gene Kelly, this is a perfect example of how genre shapes film. This film could not be made nearly as well, with the same quality stars, or may have not even been received as well, if it had come out under any studio other than MGM. Since MGM was known for their musicals and their star, Gene Kelly, was known for his dancing, going into this film, audiences knew what genre to expect and what quality to expect. MGM continued their Musical reign with other films, like An American in Paris and The Band Wagon among others. These films further solidified MGM's role as the Musical genre champion.

All in the Family vs. Modern Family

One of my favorite new sitcoms on TV is ABC's Modern Family. It's a hilarious comedy about the all challenges and opportunities that a family these days might face. So who is this modern family? The father of the family, Jay, who's divorced his crazy wife and remarried a younger, beautiful Columbian woman who's accompanied by a very mature young son from a previous marriage. Jay's son who's gay lives with his partner and they've recently adopted a baby from China. Then there's the more "typical" family of Jay's daughter, the responsible Mom trying to control her kids, the Dad who tries to be cool, the ditsy boy-crazy older sister, nerdy middle sister, and idiotic younger brother. It's a crazy cast and a crazy family, but the show puts a comedic spin on real issues that are important in today's society, just as All in the Family did in the 1970's. The show's styles are very different though. All in the Family was more of a typical sitcom, while Modern Family has been styled after many other current shows in the mockumentary genre. With this style, you get more of a personal perspective from each character rather than having to read into what they say or do to develop their character more, as in All in the Family. Although I'm not an avid watcher of All in the Family, from the episode we watched, the issue of homosexuality that they dealt with there was surprisingly similar to what's still a crucial part of shows like Modern Family. In both shows, the traditional father is struggling with accepting homosexuality, whether it's his son's friend, as in All in the Family, or his own son, as in Modern Family. But the issues being dealt with have definitely grown in variety since the 1970's. On current shows such as Modern Family, more issues that have become acceptable in society are discussed, like teen relationships, sexuality, and drinking, marital struggles and even divorce to name a few. But what goes beyond comedy and even the cultural issues in these shows is the overall importance of family. The beauty of a sitcom is that no matter what happens in the episode, usually by the end of the show the family has come back together as a unified group who still cares about each other.