Assignment 7: Analyzing Rushmore

Theme:

This scene from Rushmore is one of Wes Anderson’s more straight forward scenes of all his films.  Both character’s claim that a girl was their Rushmore.  This implies that they are both looking for what matters to them the most and what makes them keep going in life, since max’s love for his school (Rushmore) is the reason he is a diehard playwright and overall an active person.  All in all the theme of this movie is find what keeps you going and harness it to make it into who you are.

 Analysis: 

Aesthetically I want to discuss the scene’s movement and rhythm because its interesting me how there is next to no movement in this minute and half and how Wes Anderson used Rhythm to focus on the lack of movement.

            First, Anderson uses a static rhythm with his use of lines to add to the seriousness and awkwardness of the scene.  All the lines are linear with the trees through the cemetery being the only lines besides the virtual lines between Max and Mr. Blume.  Even Mr. Blume is standing perfectly straight.  This static rhythm goes well with the lack of movement as neither the camera or objects move for quite sometime.  However the movement is clearly based around point of interest and objects towards the end of the scene.  The camera begins to change which character is being focused on with over the shoulder shots of Blume and close-ups of Blume’s face.  Also object movement occurs as Max becomes upset and walks away.  Here we find Max walking out the frame giving the scene a movement through frame rhythm as well.

            Finally the script displays a contrast and affinity between characters and uses tension and release through the plot.  The characters are contrasted through their age, giving Max a childish point of view and Mr. Blume a weathered life point of view.  However being in the same situation over the same girl there is an extreme affinity between the characters, which is also shown through this scene as the both claim someone was their “rushmore.”  The tensions and release is displayed through their dialogue as they remain uptight with each other straight through the scene.  As their mood fails to change, tension is released through the fall of the tree breaking up the emotion and adding laughter to the situation.

Assignment 8: Who knew these blogs could be considered art!?!

http://changethis.com/manifesto/show/66.01.Brainwashed

In Brainwashed Godin discusses the topics of Acknowledging the Lizard, Making Art, and Failure.  Here is what he means by each:

Acknowledge the Lizard:

According to Godin there is a part of our brain called the lizard brain.  This part of our brain fears being laughed at and causes anger as a result of embarrassment.  This part of our brain is what causes an artist to quit making art.  Fearing to be laughed at can either make us hid our art in our rooms or quit the process of making art all together.  However as our world change so has the artist as more and more people become willing to show their art.  Artists have realized that the resistance of the lizard brain is the sole barrier between today and their art.  By acknowledging the lizard brain we can come to terms with being laughed at and therefore ignore its resistance, by expecting the worst out of art, yet still doing the work.

Making Art:

Art isn’t necessarily a painting or drawing, but a platform to create something new, according to Godin. Art follows no rules and strictly a product of human creation.  As long as it posses the ability to change the spectators view or spark thought art has been made.  By something making something new and connecting with those around us we are performing an act of art. It’s risky for it may lead to laughter and failure, but these risks are what make art successful and rewarding.

Failure:

Godin demands that at some point our art fails.  People have for to long gone about making art with an attitude negative in nature.  They would make their art seem like it was done with no effort or care therefore not failing for it was some form of off hand creation with no emotional attachment.  However with todays organizations surviving by shipping risky things, we have to able to approach our projects with full hearted effort.  Going all out to fail is still creative and gives us the tenacity to go hard and fail until we get it right.  The repercussions of failure can ultimately lead to success.

Blogs make me an artist:

I feel like these blogs do actually help me harness this three layers as an artist. 

For starters this process does in fact make me create art.  Whether I’ve had to create a story board, or listening phase analysis, or a character my work is being displayed online with capability to influence others who gander upon my media 203 blog.  In essence every three weeks I find myself spending several ours creating something that didn’t previously exist and although they generally just help me learn the material I’m studying more thoroughly, these blogs are opened to the public to see and maybe bounce some ideas off of.  Regardless if anyone looks at my blog or not, my TA gives me a grade based on my work, meaning my art is impacting someone in some way they weren’t previously inclined to before.

As for failure, the blogs tend to find ways to upset and make me feel like I will be receiving a 20 out of 75 each time.  For instance I have been in a position where I had to post a pdf on the blog as well as a story board, which is, in both cases, impossible to do.  Now I could’ve quit and decided, “well I could do bad on this assignment, but would rather not do it since somehow I can weasel my way into posting it later,” but I didn’t.  Instead I became creative and found other ways to post my assignments.  By going balls to the walls I took screen shots of my script to post on my blog and even created 10 individual drawings of my storyboard in order to post them as photos on my blog.  These displays of my work could’ve been rejected and not gradable, but I set myself up for failure anyways.  I have an A in media 203.

Finally in acknowledging the lizard I find myself questioning what I’m doing all the time.  Every time I do one of these assignments have no clue if im using the right vocab or if my TA is printing copies of my pictures to send to her friends in mockery of myself.  MY lizard brain fears getting my grade sheet back, yet I push past this fear of laughter and go for the assignment anyways.  In fact it’s lead me to draw some things of a quality much higher than I once thought possible. 

In the end these blogs have helped me become a better artist in the sense that I’m constantly using these three layers of creativity in order to produce work that hopefully impacts ShanShan in some way shape or form.

Assignment 9: The Invalid Rendall

Here is Rendall's article in which this blog's response is to:
http://changethis.com/manifesto/show/45.02.FreakFactor


RESPONSE:

David Rendall’s Freak Factor doesn’t really appear to be more than a motivational speech.  In this article we find Rendall explaining that no one truly has weaknesses if you harness them the correct way and look at the positive outcome of the weakness you possess.  Essentially the article is offering 9 ways for self-improvement.   Rendall begins these by stating, “efforts to fix weaknesses are ineffective,” therefore suggesting that there is a better way to fix your downfalls and improve your life.  He proceeds to give us these nine ways to do so only after telling his reader that becoming well rounded is impossible and undesirable, which he has learned through his life experience as an individual, consultant, parent, and leader.

As an individual I found all but two of his 9 steps to improvement extremely invalid, especially with his use of non-self experience examples to support his theory.

            I began to realize this right from the start with part three “Flawless: There’s Nothing Wrong With You.”

            First off this title has already made the author a hypocrite for he has already stated, “everyone has limitations,” which is a nice way of stating everyone has something wrong with them.  Now instead of step three saying everyone has something wrong with them so why worry about it, it states that every weakness is complimented by a strength therefore is not a weakness.  He even goes as far as to say that these pairs of strengths and weaknesses are “unique characteristics” that is inseparable.  For instance in his homemade list if you are a positive person you are dammed to be unrealistic.

            His quality references prove his case. For instance Albert Einstein had a messy desk and he was creative, and even Andy Rooney said, “creativity doesn’t come out of order, it comes out of messiness.”  If that doesn’t convince you that creativity comes with messiness, I don’t know what will.  On top of that having addictions is actually a strength as well.  Todd Crandell was a drug addict for 15 years and now that he is addicted to ironman triathlons all is well.  So don’t worry if you are scrounging around for meth for 15 years there is nothing wrong with you, for eventually you’ll become addicted to something else due to your uniqueness of intensity.

Step three is nothing, but a way to feel better about yourself.  Instead of excepting a weakness Rendall is asking us to look at the strength that comes with the weakness.  In the end I feel the best way to avoid being a mess or an addict is to clean your room or go to rehab rather than smile and say hey I have strengths too.  Why not smile and say hey I have one more thing that isn’t a detriment to my life?

The second step that I find extremely invalid would be part 8 “The Power of Uniqueness.”

Here we find Rendall describe how the Leaning Tower of Pisa, is such a great attraction because it is unique.  Who would go see an impressive display of architecture if it wasn’t leaning?

Building off this example he gives five lessons learned from the tower ending with, “people will always try to get you to straighten up, to be normal, to stop being a freak. Don’t pay attention to them. Just ask them how many people would travel halfway around the world to see the Perfectly Vertical and Normal tower of Pisa.”  Rendall let me ask you how many people travel around the world to see the Empire State Building or the Eiffel Tower?

I do agree with Rendall that uniqueness is something to embrace.  Believing in yourself and holding on to your weird aspects will ultimately make you a happier person.  Yet if you are a person who isn’t leaning this doesn’t mean you won’t be successful. 

People are unique and some people blend in, yet both types of these people potential could have some form of success.  All in all everyone human being is unique.  People can try to be fake or act like someone else, but no two people possess the same genetics.  I guess what I’m saying is that ultimately being unique isn’t a weakness and shouldn’t even be looked at as one.  If this section was titled “be yourself,” and elaborated more on personality rather than if you are physically leaning or different.  You should embrace your uniqueness, Rendall is right, but unique to me is a positive word.  If you embrace your uniqueness it would appear again no weakness has been conquered by step 8 nor has any knowledge for your well being.

Stepping aside from being a negative nancy / realistic, according to Rendall, I’m going to move on to a positive of this list which would, again according to Rendall, prove to be unrealistic.

I feel part five, “Build on Your Strengths” is the best possible thing Rendall has given to his reader.  People should be focusing on their strengths and moving on with their lives.  Dwelling over your weaknesses will get you no where unless its legitimately something that needs fixed, such as addiction.

Also this is the only advice Rendall provides that legitimately makes you feel better about possessing a weakness.  In part five he says your strengths make up for your weaknesses, which couldn’t be anymore true.  If you focus on your strengths enough and become proficient at them the good will begin to outweigh the bad. 

I don’t feel that by doing this you can necessarily ignore the weaknesses you possess, but if you are truly down on yourself work on something that makes you feel good, as Rendall says. 

The best way to overcome your weaknesses would definitely fall in this category.  When you become proficient at what you do you tend to have more spare time in your life, allowing for the fixing of your flaws.  Also focusing on your strengths ultimately will make you feel better, and send you in a direction that puts you forward in life rather than looking back at you think you should fix.

Rendall also states, “You have the greatest potential in your areas of strength.”  I couldn’t agree with him more, which is why I feel this is one of the few valid points he makes throughout the article.  Focusing on your potential will get you somewhere, focusing on detrimental flaws will not.

My Strengths and Weaknesses

Within the creative process I would have to say I have more strengths than weaknesses, which is egotistical, but probably/hopefully how my peers feel about themselves.  I find myself very tenacious, passionate, patient, and original when it comes to my creative process. 

My patience allows me to work with others as we bounce ideas off each other to come to a happy medium.  I’ve found my tenacity through how many times I’m willing to reshoot a scene or mess with a camera angle in order to get the shot / scene I’m filming just right.  Finally I’m passionate and original in my filming process, for I find myself doing projects composed of several mediums and usually written by myself as well as for the reason that it will better me in life rather than a grade in class.

I feel my weaknesses are an extreme case of procrastination and a bit too large of an ego.  My procrastination has gotten to a point where everything is last minute and I’m even writing paper the morning before the class.  In fact I’m doing all three of these blogs on the last night I possibly could.  On top of this my ego seems to be keeping me from collaborating with people by my own choice.  I need to find a way to overcome this since making a movie is definitely not a one man job, however it seems impossible for me to do so because I want everything done just right.  Overall I need to focus on trusting my peers as much as myself. 

USE OF 3 RULES FOR RORSCHACH's OPENING MONOLOGUE

SHOT 1

OVERHEAD 1

SHOT 2

 OVERHEAD 2

 SHOT 3

OVERHEAD 3

 SHOT 4

 OVERHEAD 4

 SHOT 5

 OVERHEAD 5

USE OF RULES WITHIN SHOTS:

The shot sequence used for Rorschach’s opening monologue definitely follows all three rules. 

            With the Rule of thirds we always find Rorschach on the right side of the third in wide shots.  For instance in the first frame he is off to the right while the drain and floating newspaper consume the left third of the shot.  Also in the Close-up of him examining the Comedian’s pin the moon and buildings fill in the upper right third, the pin fills in the lower right third, and Rorschach consumes the left thirds.  The other shots are close-ups so the thirds are consumed by Rorschach’s face.  The rule of thirds is clearly used to establish setting and Rorschach’s features keeping the two in focus.

            For the rule of 180 we find the camera always on Rorschach’s left side or directly in front of his face.  Both over the shoulder shots are over his left shoulder staying on the same side of the 180 degree line.  Then the director utilizes the line itself, by positioning the camera directly behind Rorschach as he looks back at the building and directly in front of him as he looks at the building.  Although this rule was not necessary with the use of close-ups it was seemingly still used with camera constantly positioned on his left.

            The rule of 30 is used in the sense of 30 percent.  The camera remains in the same angle unless after a close up of more than a 30 percent increase.  The camera then goes back to a more than 30 percent decrease when going back to the over the shoulder shots.

            The director was clearly aware of the rule of thirds and 30 in his shot sequence.  He made sure he established the most important elements with the rule of thirds, focusing on the pin, Rorschach’s face and the setting of the location.  The rule of thirty prevented any jumps between his closeups and OTS shots as well.  With the rule of 180 he did follow it, but it could’ve been out of habit since with close-ups he was allowed to break this rule, however with that said it is clear he is an experienced cinematographer and can create clean flowing sequences without jump cuts.

ANIMATION COMPARISON

FANTASTIC MR FOX IMAGES:

IMAGE 1

IMAGE 2

COMPARISON OF COLOR SCHEMES AND LIGHTING:

My images come from Fantastic Mr. Fox, but compare the lead characters (the foxes) to a supporting character Kylie. 

            With the picture of the foxes we find various brighter hues in the color scheme.  Mr. Fox contains an analogue color scheme composed of his orange fur and off-white red pinstriped shirt.  Mrs. Fox also contains orange fur but is accented by a redish hued dress.  As for the younger foxes, Ash and Christopherson, we see Ash with just the orange Hue, and Christopherson with a grey Hue analogued by his blue shirt.  Together the foxes create a split complimentary color scheme, with the use of Chirstopherson’s softer blue and grey colors.  All of these colors are fully saturated with the orange being very deep accented by a washed out saturated white; the same goes for Christopherson’s grey fur.  The colors saturate out to black around their facial features creating accents that help make their faces come to life.

            A hand held lamp in the foreground, which casts a dark shadow behind all the foxes, creates the lighting in this shot.  The light is warm which casts a positive feeling around the characters and helps symbolizes they are the protagonists of this story.  This can also be said for their color scheme as their combination of colors can be said to represent a thrist for action (orange), intellect (light yellow), understanding (light blue), and love (light red).

            KIley’s color scheme (image 2) is also an analogue scheme as his grey fur is accented by a green vest and hat.  His saturations are all dark along with the value of his colors.  The saturations fall into full olive green with few black accents and the grey in his face holds a dark saturation as well. The lighting for Kiley is focused on his face casting a shadow on his right shoulder and the background of his chair.  The light is seemingly fluorescent and gives off a very neutral feel to the character overall in terms of mood. 

            This was more than likely done to emphasize his supporting role part, for Kiley isn’t a negative character.  In fact his colors stand for peace.  With that in mind Kiley is simply a peaceful character, but not as important as the foxes, explaining his fluorescent lighting compared to their warm lighting and why he is in the background instead of the foreground of Image 1.

MY BODY IS A CAGE COMPARISON

Peter Gabriel's version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qsox-MIKLkQ
Arcade Fire's version:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pyp34v6Lmcc

LISTENING FRAMEWORK

MY BODY IS A CAGE BY ARCADE FIRE

LISTENING PHASE 1 (Rhythm):

Tempo [slow, medium, fast] 

Moderato

Source [where is the rhythm coming from?]

Electronic drums guided by the lead vocals. 

Groove [describe how the personality of the rhythm]

Baroque Rock.

LISTENING PHASE 2 (Arrangement)

Instrumentation [which instruments drive the song?] 

Organ, Electronic drums, snare drum, Bass, violins, also vocals (harmony and lead).

Structure/Organization [how is the song built? Order, patterns, etc.]

There isn't really a chorus or typical structure however if I were to label it in any way it would by this.

verse / verse / bridge / instrumentation / verse / verse / climax / Repetition of set my spirit/body free / outro with ohhhs

Emotional Architecture [Draw how the song build and drop?]

The song is a constant build up of intensity and longing which is never relieved as the lead singer is still asking to have is spirit let free in the end.

The top of this graph's y would be more longing over time.

LISTENING PHASE 3 (Sound Quality)

Balance

-Height [high and low of frequency]

The frequencies are mainly higher in this song.  The only aspects that hit lower frequencies would be the deepness of the organ and the hollowness of the electric toms.

-Width [stereo panning left/right]
The width isn't very wide in this song.  At the beginning it would appear most of the sound is coming from the left and then erupts into a full left and right use of sound once all the instrumentation comes into play.

-Depth [layers of instruments - via loudness]
There is a lot of depth to this sound over loudness.  IT starts simple with a soft organ, vocals, and electronic drums...but soon erupts into choir like sounds, heavier organs, bass, vocals, and strings.

LISTENING FRAMEWORK

MY BODY IS A CAGE BY Peter Gabriel

LISTENING PHASE 1 (Rhythm):

Tempo [slow, medium, fast] 

Andante

Source [where is the rhythm coming from?]

Driven by the piano.

Groove [describe how the personality of the rhythm]

Melancholy, depressing, piano rock.

LISTENING PHASE 2 (Arrangement)

Instrumentation [which instruments drive the song?] 

Piano, horns, violins, vocals

Structure/Organization [how is the song built? Order, patterns, etc.]

SAme structure with different instrumentations and breaks

Instrument intro / verse / verse / instrumentation / bridge / pause / instrumentation / soft instrumentation / climax / pause / verse / verse /  Repetition of set my spirit/body free / outro with ohhhs

Emotional Architecture [Draw how the song build and drop?]

This song holds a lot of intensity but is mainly formed around a build of depression of some sort which climaxes at a release of tension and comes back down into the depression.

Much like a bell curve, with the top of the y representing the release in tension and the bottom of the y being the depression.

LISTENING PHASE 3 (Sound Quality)

Balance

-Height [high and low of frequency]

This song plays a lot with high and low frequencies balancing the high frequencies of the strings with the low frequencies of his vocals.

-Width [stereo panning left/right]

We receive a lot of width through the piano in this song as the lower pitches played on the piano come from far left while the higher pitches come from the far right.  Everything else seems to fill the middle

-Depth [layers of instruments - via loudness]

There isn't a lot of depth instrumentally.  Its basically four layers vocals, piano, horns, and violins.  However the variety in loudness creates a great depth as the song goes from ear shatteringly loud to no sound at all.

ESSAY:

The song I chose is a cover so the lyrics have remained the same between both Arcade Fire’s original version and Peter Gabriel’s interpretation.  However Peter Gabriel spaces out the verses more dramatizing the effect of the lyrics, which is done so to the point his song his two minutes longer.

The Melodies are also entirely different and give off two completely different emotional architectures.  Arcade Fire’s Melodies are much higher pitched and resonating with the tone of Win Butler’s voice and the piping organ in the background.  Also the rest of the band sings backup to Win Butler creating a choir like sound, as well as creating a track with an overall feel of a song that would be played at church. This gives the song its feeling of longing for something more.

However in Peter Gabriel’s version we find the slower choppier pacing creating a feeling that is almost more depressing than anything.  In Peter Gabriel’s case the lyric “My body is a cage” is an actual trap that he can’t get out of, where as in Arcade Fire’s version its more so that the vocalist is aware of his body’s limitations and feels there is more outside of his own mind.   Peter Gabriel creates this depressing tone with his deep voice and somber piano fueling the song, especially at an extremely slow tempo.

As for overall musical quality the songs seem to have the same organization although this organization occurs at two different speeds.  Arcade fire uses a combination of versus’ and a rise in instrumentation to give the song an ordered organization whilst Peter Garbiel does the same, however in Andante rather than AF’s moderato tempo.  As for timbre Arcade Fire is rather complex, with its use of electronic drums and reverberating the organ, where as Peter Gabriel’s version remains more simple and clean with orchestral instrumentation.  Gabriel’s pitches however highly contrast with high in low combining his low voice with the high piano notes and violin strings.  Arcade Fire all around has a higher pitch with Butler’s vocals and choice of instrumentation.  Finally Gabriel and Arcade Fire use the same rise in Intensity from loud to soft, although Gabriel’s version fades out to soft in the end.  As for Rhythm Arcade Fire uses a consistent regular rhythm throughout the song while Gabriel uses breaks in the sound to create random pauses and an irregular rhythm. 

Rorschach is Duh Boss

The scene being analyzed in this post runs from 10 seconds to 2:04 in this clip. We are looking at Rorschach's opening monologue from watchmen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEpz3h9Pr0Q

Script:

Analysis:

In this clip most of the sounds heard are causal or literal representations of the events occurring throughout the scene.  Specific instances include the grappling hook break through the police tape and dragging on the tiled floor, to the entirety of the segment in which Rorschach digs through the comedian’s closet.  However some semantic sounds are recognizable within the scene as well.  The most obvious of which occurs while Rorschach scales the building with the grappling hook.  As he ascends the building we hear sort of an electrified noise that increases in pitch as he approaches the window.

            Along with listening modes the space of the sound was obvious throughout the scene.  For instance looking at the same segment where Rorschach scales the building, the change in pitch from low to high depicts Rorschach going higher in elevation and represents his movement.  His movement is obvious due to this effect even when the sound becomes off screen.  Along with movement there is a strong presence of emotion through sound, specifically when Rorschach enters the comedian’s room.  As he kicks open the door we find the door making a hollow creaky sound that echoes and resonates for several seconds around the room.  Doing this with sound creates the eerie presence and unsettlement Rorschach and the audience are receiving from the scene, which is necessary since Rorschach is investigating a murder.