Readings:
B. Ruby Rich, "Comings and Goings"
Christina Lane, "Just Another Girl Outside the Neo-Indie"
Questions:
1. B. Ruby Rich mentions her unrestrained use of adjectives in describing Go Fish in the Sundance film festival's catalogue. Which of her adjectives do you find the most or least applicable to the film? Citing specific examples from the film, make an argument that supports your choice/perspective.
2. After reading Christina Lane's article, what do you perceive to be the biggest challenge facing women filmmakers who hope to follow up their first independent feature with a successful and enduring career in the film industry?
17 comments:
1.I find the adjective wistful is most applicable for “Go Fish.” Many scenes in the film represent a longing or yearning for an ideal type of relationship, whether it is sexual or emotional. I think many scenes reflect on an ideal, attentive relationship in the film. An example of this is the bridges (acting almost as transitions) between the scenes. The bridges depict extreme close ups of hands lingering near each other, or just a close up of the side of the face, including the lips really connects the viewer with emotions and gestures of the characters. These transitions and the awkward shots (perhaps the long shots where the character is shown standing at a distance from the other) show the nervousness of the characters and show their hopefulness in their not wanting their actions to be ‘wrong.’ Some shots included the bare back or leg of a character, and then cut to the other character looking at the bare back or leg – this was very much longing for. Overall, this film was very reflective -as Rose Troche said in the B. Ruby Rich article- of a happy relationship between lesbians. It showed the nervousness, the anxiety, and lastly the circumstances that brought two lesbians to be happy together.
2. The biggest challenge that I perceive facing women filmmakers is that people are just more familiar with a male director. Christina Lane’s articles states “women who have something to say lapse into tones of didacticism.” I think that films made by women filmmakers often include politics or feminism theories, and sometimes people just get frustrated with watching a film that feels as if it is imposing its ideas upon the viewer, or trying to educate (as opposed to entertain). This is definitely a reason why some people lose interest in films with women directors. Also, people expect men directors, as they are more associated with directing positions and are more prominent in regards to directing than women are (at least mainstream Hollywood films or in an enduring film industry career). The public is so used to seeing the ‘male gaze’ that when they see a film that represents or deals with a women’s topic or issue (especially when it is directed by a women) their perception and outlook is a bit shaken. It seems that the movie with the most universal appeal is the film that does get successful and enduring careers in the film industries. However, Decreased visibility. Flat out, industries would rather make a profit than a statement, and for many women filmmakers in the independent realm, their goal is to make a statement more than profit. “Go Fish” was able to do both, because they knew how to market themselves – “promoted via difference.” The filmmaker was marketed as well as her film (her identity as a woman/lesbian, and her film about a happy lesbian relationship). For women, I definitely think that it is just as important they are promoted as much as their movie. Perhaps then they will receive more recognition and establish themselves to be seen ‘in the light’ as a permanent fixture in the industry.
I would say that Wistful is the best adjective to describe Go Fish. I looked up wistful just to make sure I knew exactly what it meant and it is a yearning or longing, a sense of hope. I feel that the film has that quality throughout it; whether it is the longing for love or the film’s desire to create a lesbian cinema. The film is basically like a romantic comedy that happens to have lesbians as the main characters. I assume the purpose is to show that lesbians are exactly like everyone else, they just happen to like women. In the article they talk about how the cast was volunteer and there was a sense of camaraderie between these people to be apart of something that would hopefully change ignorant views held by many people of the day. The scene in which Max and Eli first kiss the camera seems to play around a bit, choosing to focus on the tense movements of the hand and does a very good job of expressing that the two are both interested in each other but are not sure what to do about it. This wistfulness shared by the lovers to be with each other also expresses the larger picture of the film that lesbians and women in general have been longing to make their mark in cinema.
I think the thing holding back women from entering into a successful film career is the status quo. Throughout history in art, and other things society has been very patriarchal. And if the question comes down to money, the ones holding the proverbial checkbook are generally old white men, whom generally know more about making money than what makes them money. On an abstract tangent, men are generally competitive especially with each other and aren’t willing to let a competitor into the scene simply because she happens to be a woman. Before I sound too sexist, I want to say that I think the whole thing is ridiculous. A few years ago when I heard that gay marriage was an issue, I thought it was a joke. How can people not see the parallels between slavery, race, sexual orientation, etc.? In the end it comes down to who is holding the cards, and that person has to be progressive enough to not be afraid of competition.
Rich mentions her unrestrained use of adjectives in describing Go Fish. There are two adjectives that I found to be very applicable to this film. The first adjective that I think described this film to a tee is “wistful”. I believe that the context of this adjective describes how laid back this film was. Not only was the plot and text very relaxed but the characters gave the impression that they were relaxed with each other and the content of the film. This wistful and relaxed feeling during the film helped me to be more laid back and relaxed. I’m not going to lie, but I was very nervous to see this film because of the content and the fact that I have never seen a film like this. Another adjective that I thought was applicable to this film was “seriocomic”. Rich interviews the Roche and Turner and they said that Go Fish was born as a comedy. They did a good job of telling a serious and adult story that was light hearted and funny.
After I read Lanes article I realized some to the challenges that face women film makers. I think that the women feel that they need to prove themselves to their male peers and to the audience. There is a lack of confidence even if they talk the talk. It seems like they are afraid to give their opinions on important subjects. They also want to make their statement and personal opinions told. That sounds like it contradicts itself, which it does but I think that is one of the main challenges that these female filmmakers face.
1. B. Ruby Rich mentions her unrestrained use of adjectives in describing Go Fish in the Sundance film festival's catalogue. Which of her adjectives do you find the most or least applicable to the film? Citing specific examples from the film, make an argument that supports your choice/perspective.
One adjective that she uses in describing Go Fish in the Sundance film festival is wistful. By definition, wistful is described as having or showing a feeling of vague or regretful longing. I feel this is the most applicable to the film because this has to do with the main character Ely. In the beginning, I feel she is introduced as plain and apart of her is missing. She is shy and quiet, but at the same time she is missing someone. We find out she has a girlfriend in Seattle the she rarely sees and never talks to. In this fact, I feel she is regretfully longing for her. Ely knows that there are other women out there, but she has the comfortable situation with this one woman we never meet. She is wistful in the beginning because she likes Max and has a crush on her, but is hesitant to do anything about it because she has this partner out in Seattle. The second half of the film, she puts her wistfulness aside and starts to open up more. For example, when Max and her are first on the couch at Ely's place they kiss, but the moment quickly ends after the answering machine picks up and it is the parter from Seattle.
2. After reading Christina Lane's article, what do you perceive to be the biggest challenge facing women filmmakers who hope to follow up their first independent feature with a successful and enduring career in the film industry?
After reading this article, I feel that it is more challenging for women filmmakers to follow up their first independent feature because males dominate the women in the business. For example, "Troche (after Go FIsh) found she was stuck in the development stage. After a series of disenchanting development meetings withe New Line, she came t the determination that 'women just get chewed up by the system'". She finally went to Europe and made a movie which went fairly well. She then came back to the states and still received criticism from people. I feel that men dominate this area, not to say women don't belong because I have some favorite movies done by women filmmakers. It just seems that men get more work offers, than women do. And everyone sees more movies done by male directors than female directors, at least I do in the U.S. I wish it would be easier for women to get better offers after their first indie. Especially if their indie does super well like Go Fish. Bryan P.
1. I guess wistful does describe the film, the entire film has a nice light hearted feel to it, even though it does deal with a very serious subject that is still a problem today. There were some serious scenes but for the most part the movie made me smile. Being gay myself it was nice to see a film that represented a homosexual reality in the world that they lived in. I liked the progression that the film had from start to finish and the journeys that both characters went on. I almost felt sometimes that the film had a sort of identity crises at times. The serious scenes were too sporadic through the film, I guess sporadic could be another adjective to describe the film. I thought the part where the character was faced by a crowd of lesbians asking her questions about sleeping with men was a little random, but I suppose it is an issue that they deal with, just like a gay man sleeping with women.
2. One problem that could arise would be the issue of the female director. I think that female directors feel constantly at odds with male directors, like they need to prove themselves or something. I think what they need to do is find their own voices like the two did for Go Fish. They seemed to find their niche. That may be a flaw though also because some women film makers might be categorized as niche filmmakers but the same thing can happen with male directors too. It is just harder for females to get out there because there is a lack of them to begin with and thus there is no support base for them out there.
I find B. Ruby Rich’s adjective lyrical to be the most applicable to the film. As mentioned in class, Go Fish was not only a romantic comedy about lesbians looking for love, but also an experimental piece as well. The plot is straight forward and carries the movie forward, but the intervention of a personal moment still relating to the overall story turns the film into a lyrical piece. The first example is when Ely’s roommate slept with a guy and on her way home she’s plagued by guilt. This guilt is portrayed by a mob attack from the lesbian community. The way they attacked her with words and the way she responded was like a poetic slam. Another example of a lyrical moment is the wedding scene where Max is dressed as a bride. The voice over repetition and scene repetition flows like a reoccurring thought. Even in regular shots that is actually the story such as Ely making dinner for the dinner party, the use of close up, slow motion, and cross cutting between the love making and food making flows together. The film has a nice balance of story and experimental scenes that when put together, is seamless.
It’s not news that we live in a male dominate society. I think the biggest challenge for female directors who hope to follow up their career is marketing. Not only is the film being marketed to audience, but the director can influence gross as well. We learned this in class during the Tarentino discussion that people choice of movies can be influenced by a director’s charisma. Also, according to Lane, “mini-major market don’t take initiative to develop women’s niche market”, therefore, less people are interested and female films and it become less marketable.
1. When reading B. Ruby Rich's article, the adjective I believe to be most appropriate is wistful. I feel that it is wistful on two fronts, the subject within the film and the film itself. It is hopeful in the sense that the female characters, most notably Max and Eli's relationship. They are wistful throughout the entire film to get together, since there was a mutual attraction. More of a feeling of hope on from Max, since she was under the impression that Eli already had a girlfriend. The film as a symbol, is wistful to make an impact on the cinema world. They attempted to bring lesbianism to the forefront of a film that was featured at Sundance, and tried to not make it seem as such a bad thing. They presented it in normal fashion, and were wistful that the film would be accepted by the general public.
2. I see it as sort of difficult for a female director to have success in the film industry, let alone repeat success. It is a industry truly ruled by men, as was show in class last week... the male directors we've viewed so far have had a much higher success rate than females. Also, the ratio of male and female directed films viewed in class is considerably in favor of the males. The pressure that men place on women in a male dominated world make it even harder for a woman to repeat her success. It would especially be difficult to repeat if your first feature film was about lesbians - a culture and thing that is generally seen as taboo in our country.
1. I thought lyrical best described "Go Fish" when choosing an adjective to go along with this film. From the very beginning I could tell that this movie had a good screenplay. From the points where there are simple conversations to the points where there is a montage of one of the girls narrating her fears and/or hopes in a wedding dress I thought that it was a very lyrical film. The other main scene that makes this film "lyrical" in a sense is the scene where one of the girls (can't remember her name) apparently has sex with a man and she is immeaditly put on trial by many of the other lesbians that live in the area. That scene almost seemed like poetry, with the way that she would defend herself and then one of the other women would either defend her or usually insult her for calling herself a lesbian. These are just a few examples of why I thought this film would best be described as lyrical.
2. In regard to what the biggest challenge that women face after having made a hit Independent movie, I think it is simply the fact that they are women. The top people in prodcution companies these days usually perfer a big name director or else a man who has created a large amount of buzz around himself. Not that women havn't ever been noticed in directing/writing catagories of film but lately they have really fallen off except for Kusama. I think sometimes women are afraid to put their ideas out there, specifically to major studios because if it does not go as they planned there is an old-fashioned stigma put back into place that women are not as good as men when it comes to making movies. I think this "status quo" if you will is starting to go away and hopefully in the future women will have just as good a chance at making it as directors, as men have for such a long time.
1. “Seriocomic,” a very literal description of the film Go Fish. Like real life it comes at you from a variety of angles. At times your just hanging out then your sad, happy, emotional, confused, and possibly frightened. However, Half serious and half comedic is a wonderful balance. The friend that sleeps with everyone, conversations with heads together and looking up into the camera, the replay, seen through the eyes of Kia and Daria, of Max and Ely’s sexual encounter all create a good uplifting feel good mood. And if the whole movie where acted out in this way it would be a comedy. However, there is more to the story, where the brow furrows and the lips stay straight. A serious vibe transcends cautiously over the comedic performances. Evy coming out to her mother and subsequently being kicked out of the house, Max’s desire for a relationship, Ely’s struggle with climbing out of the comfortable emotional bed she has made for herself, Daria self conflict with her lesbian identity after sleeping with a male, the all female wedding montage. Go Fish is all the fun of the children’s card game with the reality that you can’t eat dinner if you don’t catch anything.
2. A female filmmaker seems to have many hurdles before the finish line than men. Alison Anders puts it best, in an article written by Christina Lane, “Major independents ‘really don’t want to know what’s in a woman’s head.’” This seems to be the biggest problem, money. Since the female directed films tend to not make as much money the studios don’t want to finance them. However, they could give them more than one strike. The window is only open a crack and one faltering breeze closes it for good.
1. Out of all Rich’s adjectives I would have to agree with “lyrical.” There was something very poetic about the film, particularly in its experimental style. Since the acting, in my opinion, was far from desirable, I feel like the camera was the most expressive part of the relationship between Max and Ely. When the conversation was awkward or uncomfortable around the two of them, the camera moved in close in order to show their physical attraction. In other words, the camera allows the audience to feel the relationship, rather than listen to the dialogue.
Another adjective I feel blends together with “lyrical” is “wistful.” I feel like the film is very expressive about homosexual identity during the avant-garde breaks in the storyline. One particular scene that stuck out in my mind was the scene in which Daria is literally put on trial for her sexual preference. The scene is shot very stylistically (many shadows and hard angles), in order to show the harsh reality of being a lesbian. The scene brings forth many questions - What really qualifies anyone to be a lesbian? If she doesn’t follow “the rules,” will she be condemned? With both the emotional and poetic imagery and the thought-provoking dialogue, “Go Fish” works on some many levels.
2. What really stood out in Lane’s article was the fact that films made by females are usually seen as “didactic” to the general public. There always has to be some sort of political statement or feministic bias with female filmmakers, which seems to turn these women into a one-hit wonder. Judging by the examples that Lane gives in the article, it is much harder for a woman to get a second film because financiers and distributors do not feel like a filmmaker can live up to what they have already created. Even if the film was a success, the backers seem to have a mentality of, “Thanks for making the statement, but let’s move on to something bigger and better.” Since films with feminist undertones also require a niche audience and slow growth, the business world becomes impatient when they do not see immediate success. This is why many women will turn to a television channel like HBO in order to have the freedom and time that they need and want.
--Anne Snyder
I would actually say that among adjectives I disagree that the word fanciful fits very appropriately at all. MY word document dictionary says fanciful: over-imaginative and unrealistic, existing only in the imagination. I did not think that Go Fish was by any means these things. In that same article, its addressed that the film had been written, directed, and produced by lesbians with a cast of real lesbians because they wanted to make a “real” film. They wanted to end they way gay women had been portrayed or idealized in film making and present a more honest depiction of the lesbian community. So I thought that it was very realistic and hardly over-imaginative. Personally, I thought the film wasn’t fabricated at all and I was convinced by each of the characters. I DO agree with what seems to be the popular choice of said adjectives in that wistful or longing describes the film well, as does lyrical. Lyrical: poetic, expressing the writer's emotions in an imaginative and beautiful way. I guess I can’t honestly say any particular moment in the film comes to mind, but the as a whole it seemed passionate and innovative with its content. The one article refers to the film as experimental, and clearly for the hype it made it was.
As for the challenge facing women film makers, I thought it seemed very clear that the reoccurring issue dealt with distribution and advertising. It seemed in every case for each of the women the article discussed, Kusama, Anders, Dash, Harris, the studios would offer them projects or support for their next project after they’d made this big impact with their first film, then wouldn’t do much of anything to see the films through. Anders had been quoted as complaining several times that she’d made her films, they had gotten good reviews, but otherwise no one saw them. The article also included a statement saying that basically the studios said “its your movie, your name is on it, but we won’t support your film with prints or advertising.” Also it was talked about factors that weakened female film makers of which both dealt on some level with the transition from trendy or independent to mainstream or “making profit.”
1. The film 'Go Fish' as the B. Ruby Rich states is a movie made for, about and produced by lesbians. This movie, at least to me, set out to make the general public aware of this subculture and put in the forefront many of the problems and thoughts that come with being a lesbian and do it in such away that a good story could be made with as much empathy and compassion as would a Hollywood straight oriented mainstream film would. The approach to this film was very experimental compared to even most independent features shown thus far in this class. There were many awkward close ups and interesting use of cutting to make the romance in its self seem really interesting and often intense, this was especially noticeable in the seen were the leads make there first kiss after coming back from a yes a 'queer' film. Not only did the film show a budding lesbian romance it also had side narrations that depicted the subculture and thats were i felt the films message was really brought home. I especially loved the images of the lying heads discussing the situations and thoughts of the characters.
2. Every since i entered film school i have always noticed the lack of females in not only the department and truth be told there isn't very many female filmmakers working in the mainstream either. But why is this? I see the point the article makes when it says that many females have a feminist story they want to depict and that studios believe audiences wont enjoy such a film so they wont spend the time to promote such a thing. But i truly believe it isnt that simple, its hard for everybody to break out and make it in film, you have to be inventive, original and most importantly engaging. I would absolutely love to see a woman make a bloody action film i think it would be freaking awesome. I think if women did things that weren't expected of them they could not only get studios to back them they would for sure get a cult following and it would pave the way for future women filmmakers to strive.
I feel that wistful would be the most applicable to Go Fish. There are moments that feel genuine filled with sadness as the main characters struggle to find happy relationships and are tired of being “alone.” The main characters yearn for emotional connections. Wistful I feel adequately describes the film because Go Fish focuses on relationships and the yearning and melancholy that goes along with the pleasure of a relationship. Max goes on a bit of an emotional rollercoaster, first denying her feelings and then becoming a bit upset by Ely’s long distance relationship. At the same time Ely seems to have a desire and longing for more as well, yet is timid and afraid of going after what she wants and leaving her past and relationship behind. It takes her a while to gain courage and pursue a relationship with Ely, and during this time, the audience really feels this wistful quality. At the time it seems that there weren’t many films made like this that take a look at women’s homosexual relationships. The film while generally light hearted, also focuses on the desire and sadness and the lack of acceptance in certain cultures. One woman’s thoughts make this point clear as she imagines being cornered and confronted by an angry mob about her sex life. Being a homosexual, and having sex with a man makes her feel unaccepted and the film dedicates a bit of time to this underlying issue and emotion.
After reading Lane’s article, it seems that the biggest challenge facing women filmmakers who hope to have a successful film career after an independent success, is the audience that their films cater towards. Lane explains that women filmmakers often find a niche within the Sundance crowd, where "art" films are not only supported but expected. When women either try to move away from an avant-garde style or bring it to a bigger studio and a broader audience the masses and companies aren’t as accepting. The unfortunate part of the film industry is that male directors are more accepted, even if their work has a more independent feel than woman, as the industry feels that these films won’t sell. The prejudice goes a bit further as Lane explains how if a woman’s film fails, the industry is quick to point fingers that it’s because she was a woman
-Jacob Feiring
1. Rich uses the adjective seriocomic, which I like. To me that word describes a lot about the film. It puts a serious stamp on the content of the film, but also gives it a light feeling. I suppose what I mean is the content of the film is a mixture light comedic moments and serious undertones. The film is never blatantly "serious", but it addresses the serious subject matter of the time being a lesbian woman in a delicate and somewhat playful way. The other word Rich uses is innocent, which I believe also applies. I the film is very much about mature lesbian women, but at it's core the two main characters are very much innocent. Max is more of the younger naive innocence and Ely is the older innocence that's achieved through many years of not being in a relationship and being comfortable alone. So in turn you have this very long drawn out innocent love story which produces a delicate innocent love story of two lesbians finding love and rediscovering what it is to be lesbian.
2. There are many challenges that face female directors after an indie success. One is the film industry sticking to what is comfortable for them, which is blockbusters with male directors, and waving this comfort zone only for trends, but trends that will earn them a profit. Once a niche isn't earning a profit, it's dropped like a bad habit and it seems that these female indie successes are niches that couldn't be supported any more. It seems that any niche that a studio or mini major can profit from is just a flavor of the month unless it can keep turning a profit. And once mini major's stated holding the keys to making independent films, it got a whole lot harder to make an independent film. And this was the time when Miramax was bought by Disney. This emergence of female directors and feminist indies only garnered success if it could be marketed well, and once the film had it's time to shine it was forgotten. And if the same director wanted to get another project off the ground, there were many obstacles that faced the female director, one of which was, could this new film be marketed the same way? Trouche said it best, "women just get chewed up by the system."
The adjective that best relates to "God Fish" in my opinion is seriocomic. Sericomic is a film that is partially serious and partially comedic. "Go Fish" is full of one-liners and jokes. I thought it was humorous to see an adult sing "U-G-L-Y! she ain't got no alibi! she's ugly!" ( when Max first sees Ely) I found that the film was also very serious in the sense that Ely and Max truly start to like each other and get into a real relationship. Also, that Ely has to break up with her girlfriend and her other serious problems with dating and insecurity.
From the "Just Another Girl" reading, I further realized the difficulties that are implied when being a female filmmaker. There is a constant feeling of having to keep up with the men. Production companies also seem to be less giving to females and less trusting in them. From what I read, the hardest thing female filmmakers deal with in trying to follow up a smash hit is finding a production company or money source that will trust them. For example, after Nancy Savoca's hit "True Love," Warner Bros hired her to direct "Dogfight" but they did not agree with her choices on how to make the film, so they did not support it or market it so it went straight to video. I think that people overall have more confidence in men and think that if a woman does good, she probably had a lot of luck and help and can't necessarily dish out something as good again and again.
1.) There are two adjectives in Rich’s article that I feel are the most applicable to the film, those being wistful and fanciful. Wistful is defined by showing or expressing vague yearnings. The basis Go Fish is the yearning for a relationship. We can see this clearing in the scene where Kia and Max are at a restaurant looking over something Max had writing. In this scene it is reveled to us through dialog that Max desperately wants a relationship. She continues to pester Kia into introducing her to several of the lesbian women there at the restaurant. Wistful is very applicable also, because the entire movie is about Max and Ely expressing that they want to be with each other to different people. That is the entire plot. I also believe fanciful is another applicable word to describe this film, because it is defined as imaginative in a playful way; whimsical; imaginary; not real. In Rich’s article Turner and Troche stated that “they wanted to make a feel good movie in spite of themselves” (Rich 95). The term fanciful can be seen in the scene in Go Fish, when Ely leaves Max’s apartment after they had sex the first time. Ely is scene basically skipping and is even handed a bundle of flowers from a random stranger.
2.) After reading Lane’s article, I perceive to be the biggest problem facing women filmmakers would have to be finding a distributor that is willing to find a specific niche for their film. The entire article described women filmmakers, who after their first success of making an independent film, failed time after time with their next films. All of the failures seemed to have a commonality to them. That being that the distributors were not really willing to put their heart and soul into these women filmmakers. Another issue is that these women filmmakers had not only to deal with the gender discrimination, but a lot then too had to face racial and sexual preface discrimination. I am not saying that the discrimination was done intentionally by the distributors, but many probably feared that these films would not be marketable to the public, because they would not be safe enough. In this article Harvey Weinstein criticizes studios for not creating and exploiting the niches.
Post a Comment