Post 10

My daily routine often involves a stroll down "the Drag" - a street known for its lack of austin flavor and (I assume) named for the DMT'd out denizens that elect to reside in its crevices. Though the city of Austin is known for its plethora of small businesses and localism ideology, the drag is hardy a microcosm of these trends. The UT tower projects almost a direct shadow onto American Apparel, a franchise known more for its sexualized advertisements than for its sound business model.

Most of the advertisements show young-looking girls deliberately dressed and positioned to evoke an "after-sex" look, with messy hair, no make-up and incomplete outfits. Some show girls with their hands down their pants, or covering their "private parts" or even just exposing themselves completely. As Dr. Straubhaar pointed out in lecture, sex is often an incredibly effective advertising tool and American Apparel has taken that allure to a pornographic degree and successfully trademarked a business out of it.

The snap-shotty and informal style of the pictures mimics our "default picture" fixation and the culture that has evolved around it. The appeal of the simple and naturally staged portraits is reflective of the sexy yet spontaneous way that we (especially females) seek to portral ourselves in our virtual social lives. In a way, American Apparel has democratized sexual imagery by functioning as bridge between the exclusive high-end brands that pull off promiscuity by coating with excess and the world of pornography.

Though business is probably driven by more by sorority girls and "neon partys" then by the hipsters and something ironic, the American Apparel on the drag and the pictures and ads that frame the store remind as all everyday that it's OK, and even cool to be just a little slutty in our own disheveled lives.

Post 8

Hollywoods three act structure has come to be the narrative style of choice for the majority of filmmakers. It serves as a good formula for evoking triumph and breakthrough- both themes that leave viewers satisfied. Unlike the Classical Tragedy, the climax of the story falls near the end of the film instead of in the middle.

It's Kind of a Funny Story, the last film I saw in theaters, follows this model. In Act I the protagonist is admitted into a mental hospital where he meets a young girl. The introduction sets up the major conflict, which happens to be interpersonal- what's the purpose of life?- he wonders and is set up to find it in the the unlikeliest of places. That's where the first major plot point occurs, and where Act II begins to answer the question that the first act presented.

In Act II the protagonist befriends several of the patients in the hospital including the girl he likes. Through these characters he begins to unload the anxieties of his past and realize the triviality of his stresses. However the issues of his past make their way into his new utopia and shake things up a bit. The girl he used to like comes in to the hospital enthralled by the legitimacy of his "issues" which throws things of with the new love interest. His dad continues to put pressures on him about school and success. He sees the realness of some of the real life problems that so many of the people in the hospital have.

The Climax happens the night before he leaves the hospital to reenter into his "normal" life and he sponsors a pizza party for everyone on his floor. Simultaneously it is revealed that every conflict is resolved; he gets the girl, his friend gets to get parcial custody over his daughter, his reclusive roommate comes out of his shell, and he stands up to his dad. The remaining falling action/resolution is his naming all of this thing he now does to keep happy and sane. There is a full montage of him ridding bikes, kissing his new girlfriend, and volunteering at the hospital. The clear beging, middle and end not only make the story easy to follow but leave the audience satisfied.

Post 7: The Sitcom

Sitcoms function as a hyperbolic reflection of the anxieties and trends that exist within popular culture at a particular moment. SItcoms are dynamic in that each episode has a resolution and can stand on its own yet allows for character development and conflicts that roll over from episode to episode. The use of hyperbole and absurdity work to gain over all appeal and to democratize the content. Hyperbole is a smart means of creating mass appeal because of the entertainment guarantee that it supplies. The outlandish nature of sitcoms serve to democratize them as opposed to more subtle methods of communication that would only appeal to highly educated audiences.

"Friends" hyperbolizes the conflicts and celebrations of "everyday life" for twenty-something urbanites. The show is framed around an intimate relationship between two of the Friends, Ross and Rachel. Perhaps every reason that normal couples break-up and get back together is employed with a hollywoodized twist. But of course, in the end, love trumps all and ten seasons later they get married. However, the permanent plot and the episodic plot are loosely intertwined. Each episode seems to have its own climax and resolutions where the humor, not the underlying storyline, is the ultimate appeal.

Punch Drunk Love

The opening shot in the film Punch Drunk Love gives us hints to the protagonists personality. Barry Egan played by Adam Sandler sits at his desk on the right side of the frame in an empty warehouse space. The shot is taken from about 30 feet back giving it a large depth of field. The shot reveals that Egan is neurotic, lonely and perhaps detached. The director was giving hints of his personality by focusing on the emptiness of the space. The drawn-out shot last for the first 45 seconds of the movie giving the audience plenty of time to decipher what exactly the director is trying to highlight and foreshadow based on the frame.



A second shot happens a few shots after the opening where a harmonium is dropped out of a racing truck on to the side of the street where Barry works. Though Barry is standing around 100 feet away, there is a shot of the harmonium from his perspective that slowly zooms in until the harpsichord is in playing distance. This foreshadows to the role that the instrument will play in the film and also attributes ominous and dark qualities to the harmonium because of the threatening way in which it is displayed. It's shot as if it were a scene from a western film where the slow zoom focuses on each cowboy as they draw their weapons, almost giving the harmonium human like qualities.



About 12 minutes in to the movie Barry goes to his sisters house for dinner and in an act of unprovoked rage he kicks down the sliding class doors as his family is sitting down to dinner. The shot is filmed from outside of the house with Barry's back to the audience and his sisters facing him. This framing is meant to make the viewer sympathize with Barry as he is attacked and ridiculed by his sisters while he stands there seemingly ignorant to what he has done. It demonstrates that his anger is random and unintentional. I like to call it a "monkey in the middle" shot where the protagonist is positioned halfway between the characters posing a threat and the camera giving a feeling of autonomy to the audience to make judgments about the characters.

Post 5

The studio system functioned like most industrial factories of the time. The demand was high given that film was the only form of mass media and most people went to see movies anywhere from 1 to six days a week. In order to produce low cost films quickly and efficiently the studio system operated like a factory. This assembly line method required that all parts of the production staff were present at all times so that the contracted actors and staff would be able to work on multiple projects at once. Movies were so popular that during WWII the theaters were opened 24 hours a day and served to keep moral high and diffuse information and propaganda. The studio system was essentially manufacturing movies with directors usually pumping out 3-5 movies per year. To further increase efficiency on the viewers end studios began to pick up "house styles" that matched them with a particular genre. Stars were also ironically linked to their studios and styles with films being refereed to as John Waynes' or Judy Garlands'.

Post 4- All in the Family

Both All in the Family and the contemporary television show Modern Family provide a commentary on family life and structure. However, the "messages" portrayed in All in the Family appear to be implicit and leave "room for interoperation" that can allow for some viewers to see the irony in Archie's character while others relate to his antiquated bigotry.

Modern Family exposes and explains social issues such as gay marriage and teenage drinking in a more explicit manor to where the audience isn't as blind to the directors message. Both discus controversial topics and both usually align with the more egalitarian and rationalistic side of the issue. In a way, both of these shows function as intermediaries to the pubic in exposing controversial topics threw a medium that allows for the humanization of the issues.

For example, seeing the gay couple interact with their adopted vietnamese child might change public opinion about gay rights issues. Likewise for All in the Family when the "manly man" ex-NFL star is exposed as homosexual and Archie is surprised--maybe this could inform the public on the realities of homosexuality and that not everyone has to be the stereotypical gay "fairy" that Archie assumed.

The greatest difference between the shows is that Modern Family focuses on the idiosyncrasies of family matters in the 21st century such as divorce, inter-racial marriage, adoption, homosexuality, teenage rebellion, and the overall perfection of imperfection. All of these nuances are represented within the main cast and present reoccurring dialogs about these issues that allow for an in depth understanding of what it means to be a "modern family." Though i've had limited exposure to the show, All in the Family, seems to approach such themes in a more satirical way, where each episode focuses on the various perspectives of an issue as represented by each member of the nuclear family.

Here's an clip of the two men discussing what it's like to play a gay couple on the show. One of the actors jokes about himself being "gay for pay" because offscreen he is heterosexual.



Below is a sickening clip of that accuses Modern Family of being pro-homosexual propaganda. I wonder if the religious extremist would have had the same reaction to Archie's surprise gay friend, or if the irony would have been too difficult to decipher.