Here is a link to the article you need to read by Monday (9/29):
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vBEZapnn0CN2F7o_ru8JIQrFG4Cv3Qw7k2RxTZG5cjM/pub
Here are the questions you need to complete by Monday (9/29):
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Tuesday, September 2, 2014
Introductions
Howdy, y'all.
Welcome to the Oakcrest High School Film Institute.
Let me begin this post by bidding farewell to Mr. Weisback, the second founding member of the Institute to move onto other things (in his case, the rigors of AP US History). We'll miss you!
New to the fold is Mr. Hearn. Let us welcome him!
Welcome to the Oakcrest High School Film Institute.
Let me begin this post by bidding farewell to Mr. Weisback, the second founding member of the Institute to move onto other things (in his case, the rigors of AP US History). We'll miss you!
 |
| File photo |
 |
| This was the most humorous photo of Mr. Hearn that I could find online. |
***
Today, we watched George Melies' "A Trip to the Moon." It is embedded below if you care to re-watch.
We also watched the Melies-inspired video for "Tonight, Tonight" by The Smashing Pumpkins. This is an excellent example of a film from 1902 resonating in the cultural echo chamber. See below.
If you enjoy this video (I prefer "1979."), please check out the documentary, Beauty is Embarrassing. The film celebrates the life and work of the wonderful Wayne White, the artist most famous for his contributions to Pee-Wee's Playhouse.
***
And now you write!
And now you write!
This blog is home to our on-going discussion of film, and like all of the other aspects of the Institute, it too is dependent upon your input and participation. With that in mind, I am operating under the assumption that you have seen at least two films this summer. In the comment section of this post, please post a reflection on two films you have seen this summer.
Two paragraphs should suffice.
Your posts must be submitted before Monday, September 8th.
To facilitate discussion, I will start things off.
Yes, I am a snob. I admit it. Despite having time off in the summer, I am not wont to frequent the theaters. Summer is blockbuster season, and I typically am not interested in today's big-budget moneymakers. Disclaimer: I am sick of superhero movies. (I thought The Dark Knight was ok. Please feel free to leave me hate mail in the comment section of this post.)
However, I did go to see Guardians of the Galaxy. This was prompted by two factors. Firstly, before the film's release, I argued its merits with a good friend of mine, a tried and true nerd. He simply cannot resist all things Marvel, but I was off put by the CGI raccoon voiced by Bradley Cooper. I arrogantly dismissed the talking creature as silly and as something that interrupted my suspension of disbelief.
To be a true naysayer, I would have to see the film. Secondly, the film generated enormous positive buzz. Many claimed it to be superior to The Avengers.
Thus, I went to see the film with an open mind and low expectations.
Guardians was excellent, and in my opinion, markedly better than almost all of the other Marvel movies (Iron Man excluded). The film was simply fun. Music, humor, and Star Wars-like world-building made this a truly a enjoyable cinematic experience. I attribute much of this to the star-making performance of Chris Pratt.
Grade: A
Before the summer began, I decided to upgrade to Amazon Prime, which includes a nice library of streaming film titles. Amazon has a fairly healthy selection of classic movies, and I decided to watch Hud, a Paul Newman picture from 1963. The film stars one of my favorite actors, and it is based on a novel by one of my favorite writers, Larry McMurtry.
Newman made some truly excellent films in the 1960's, but what separates Hud from Newman's other popular films is his turn as a charismatic yet chilling villain. Hud, the character, is pure Id: sexually promiscuous, prone to violence, greedy, and dishonest. The effortlessly charming Newman is disturbingly magnetic, and the audience can understand Hud's appeal to his innocent younger brother.
In the film's most memorable scene, Hud's father is forced to kill his stock of cattle after they have contracted a disease (Hud had wanted to sell the cattle regardless, despite the fact that their disease-tainted meat would have made people ill.). The cattle are herded into a ditch, and shot by Hud, his younger brother, and several other ranch hands. The scene is disturbing and deeply sad.
Though simple, Hud explores a damned father-son relationship and satirizes the success Americans experienced in the post WWII boom. It is a true modern Western, a film that depicts a dying breed: the heroic, ruggedly individualistic, yet selfless cowboy.
Grade: A-
 |
| Yet, I am strangely fine with this talking animal creature. |
Thus, I went to see the film with an open mind and low expectations.
Guardians was excellent, and in my opinion, markedly better than almost all of the other Marvel movies (Iron Man excluded). The film was simply fun. Music, humor, and Star Wars-like world-building made this a truly a enjoyable cinematic experience. I attribute much of this to the star-making performance of Chris Pratt.
Grade: A
Before the summer began, I decided to upgrade to Amazon Prime, which includes a nice library of streaming film titles. Amazon has a fairly healthy selection of classic movies, and I decided to watch Hud, a Paul Newman picture from 1963. The film stars one of my favorite actors, and it is based on a novel by one of my favorite writers, Larry McMurtry.
Newman made some truly excellent films in the 1960's, but what separates Hud from Newman's other popular films is his turn as a charismatic yet chilling villain. Hud, the character, is pure Id: sexually promiscuous, prone to violence, greedy, and dishonest. The effortlessly charming Newman is disturbingly magnetic, and the audience can understand Hud's appeal to his innocent younger brother.
In the film's most memorable scene, Hud's father is forced to kill his stock of cattle after they have contracted a disease (Hud had wanted to sell the cattle regardless, despite the fact that their disease-tainted meat would have made people ill.). The cattle are herded into a ditch, and shot by Hud, his younger brother, and several other ranch hands. The scene is disturbing and deeply sad.
Though simple, Hud explores a damned father-son relationship and satirizes the success Americans experienced in the post WWII boom. It is a true modern Western, a film that depicts a dying breed: the heroic, ruggedly individualistic, yet selfless cowboy.
Grade: A-
Silent Film Example from class
Welcome Back/Silent Film Challenge
Greetings, all!
Welcome to the new school year.
The embedded document contains a tentative syllabus for the 2014-2015 school year. I use the word "tentative" intentionally here: this document is subject to change.
Anticipate viewing films not yet included.
Remember: Your participation and interest will drive the direction of the institute.
The embedded document below contains the specifics for the Silent Film Challenge. As Mr. Lockwood said, "work to your strengths." Identify your best actors, cameramen, writers, editors, etc. and let them do what they do best. We want to see what you all can do!
Welcome to the new school year.
The embedded document contains a tentative syllabus for the 2014-2015 school year. I use the word "tentative" intentionally here: this document is subject to change.
Anticipate viewing films not yet included.
Remember: Your participation and interest will drive the direction of the institute.
The embedded document below contains the specifics for the Silent Film Challenge. As Mr. Lockwood said, "work to your strengths." Identify your best actors, cameramen, writers, editors, etc. and let them do what they do best. We want to see what you all can do!
Remember: Your silent films are due by the end of class, Friday, Sept. 5th.
Wednesday, May 14, 2014
They're Coming to Disappoint You, Barbara: An Open Letter to My NOLD hating students
So, you found Night of the Living Dead boring, eh? Well, first, welcome to the club. Each FI before you felt the same way. In fact, during the first FI, many students slept, the two teachers freaked-out, and the whole ordeal came to a head with a "heart-felt talk." Ahhh...the memories. How's that for undead cannibals really bringing people together?
On one hand, your reaction is nothing new. On the other hand--how DARE you?
Have we taught you nothing? You claim to love zombies but hate this movie? Romero is the knight of the living dead. No him---no zombies! One doesn't exist without the other. Without this movie, there is no Shaun of the Dead. No 28 Days Later. No nothing. Eat some gruel. Go to bed.
Do you claim to love rock 'n' roll but hate Elvis? Oh...you do? Well, my little whipper snappers, you shouldn't!
Here's how art works. You can choose to hate something influential. I hate Deep Purple. I hate the Yankees. I hated There's Something About Mary. That's ok. I'm allowed. Art exists to demand preference. It exists to rouse debate on what is pleasing to us aesthetically.
But I am aware of each of those things. I have exposed myself to them. My judgement is based on awareness at least...analysis at best! Since I have been exposed to them, I can do certain important things. I can recognize their importance. I can posit an opinion.
See?
NOLD is the Elvis of zombie movies. It is certainly your right to NOT choose to rock out to Elvis records. Maybe Elvis doesn't rock as hard as you are accustomed to rocking. But you must RESPECT Elvis' influence. Period. Kiss the ring. I won't talk rock 'n' roll with someone who never heard an Elvis song, and I WILL NOT talk horror with someone who ignored NOLD. As I will NOT ROLL ON SHABBAT!! Got it?
Have we taught you nothing? You claim to love zombies but hate this movie? Romero is the knight of the living dead. No him---no zombies! One doesn't exist without the other. Without this movie, there is no Shaun of the Dead. No 28 Days Later. No nothing. Eat some gruel. Go to bed.
Do you claim to love rock 'n' roll but hate Elvis? Oh...you do? Well, my little whipper snappers, you shouldn't!
Here's how art works. You can choose to hate something influential. I hate Deep Purple. I hate the Yankees. I hated There's Something About Mary. That's ok. I'm allowed. Art exists to demand preference. It exists to rouse debate on what is pleasing to us aesthetically.
But I am aware of each of those things. I have exposed myself to them. My judgement is based on awareness at least...analysis at best! Since I have been exposed to them, I can do certain important things. I can recognize their importance. I can posit an opinion.
See? NOLD is the Elvis of zombie movies. It is certainly your right to NOT choose to rock out to Elvis records. Maybe Elvis doesn't rock as hard as you are accustomed to rocking. But you must RESPECT Elvis' influence. Period. Kiss the ring. I won't talk rock 'n' roll with someone who never heard an Elvis song, and I WILL NOT talk horror with someone who ignored NOLD. As I will NOT ROLL ON SHABBAT!! Got it?
Romero elevated the game. He exploited us. He showed us what other horror film-makers feared showing. He made two of the most important moves in horror film history.
HE MADE ZOMBIES COOL. By making them scary. By taking the dead-eyed creepiness and adding the most important element -- FLESH-EATING!
Before Romero, movie zombies were nothing. Lame aliens and slow-moving voodoo dudes. They were like being chased by enslaved office workers. Seriously. if a zombie got you, it just wrestle you to the ground. Maybe hit you with a shoe. Honestly. They were no more dangerous than any big lumbering lummox. Easy to evade and avoid. And if by some crazy happenstance, you DID get caught...bump on the noggin. No worse.
Romero turned zombies into cannibals...and holy game changer! Now they were scary. Why? Cause aren't you, as a rule, scared of things that can eat you? Ghouls. Creeps. Flat out trouble. All flaking flesh and animal moans. "They're dead. They're all messed up." That was Romero.
Am I lying? Disprove me. Find me a cinematic zombie prior to NOLD that remotely resembles what you know and love today.
Thought so.
Zombies are still not that much trouble one on one. But Romero invented the zombie infestation. And in doing so made a film that was anxiety-inducing as well as "jump" scary. The zombies, like life, win by overwhelming you. And this delicious metaphor has kept American society shuffling the zombie walk ever since.
Everyone in the modern zombie film is gonna die. Prior to Romero, the horror movie world was going to end in the rubber hands of Mothra or some giant bug. End of the world movies involved a lot of running and screaming. But not a lot of actual threat. Godzilla would run through a building, and people would just scatter around it magically. Certainly no on-screen dying. And certainly no on-screen dying because a character got eaten by a woman in your Nana's house dress.
In Romero's apocalypse, death is coming. Inevitable. Like the viewers, the characters WILL die. It's just a matter of when. The suspense comes in whether or not they will die at this very moment. Sound familiar? Zombies are the plague. And the plague is scary real.
Also, Romero's apocalypse bought with it the consideration and pontification of death. Characters faced their mortality. They discussed it. They allowed it to bring out the worst in them. Cue The Walking Dead. Viola! Instant genre.
On top of all that, NOLD had a message to offer. It stood as testament to the "unrest" of the wildest, most radically chaotic social times in our nation's history. Romero played with convention. He slammed the man. Indicted capitalism and government. He made a socially conscious horror movie. He made a youth movement horror movie. He pushed the envelope. And that is that. Watch the dang movie 'fore I hurt somebody.
Everyone in the modern zombie film is gonna die. Prior to Romero, the horror movie world was going to end in the rubber hands of Mothra or some giant bug. End of the world movies involved a lot of running and screaming. But not a lot of actual threat. Godzilla would run through a building, and people would just scatter around it magically. Certainly no on-screen dying. And certainly no on-screen dying because a character got eaten by a woman in your Nana's house dress.
In Romero's apocalypse, death is coming. Inevitable. Like the viewers, the characters WILL die. It's just a matter of when. The suspense comes in whether or not they will die at this very moment. Sound familiar? Zombies are the plague. And the plague is scary real.
Also, Romero's apocalypse bought with it the consideration and pontification of death. Characters faced their mortality. They discussed it. They allowed it to bring out the worst in them. Cue The Walking Dead. Viola! Instant genre.
On top of all that, NOLD had a message to offer. It stood as testament to the "unrest" of the wildest, most radically chaotic social times in our nation's history. Romero played with convention. He slammed the man. Indicted capitalism and government. He made a socially conscious horror movie. He made a youth movement horror movie. He pushed the envelope. And that is that. Watch the dang movie 'fore I hurt somebody.
Friday, April 11, 2014
Screencast
http://screencast.com/t/Rb3yGJyPVx
This link will allow you to view a brief screencast explaining how to create a properly formatted MLA document.
Tuesday, April 8, 2014
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)