Ceci Moss is spot-on about the intrigue of these homemade videos: 'The novelty of their circulation itself - a historic transition from analog to digital television captured on digital video and then transmitted online - speaks to the media environment we inhabit with accidental precision.' (More can be viewed at Rhizome). Each video documents the recent US televisual event: the shutting down of analogue TV transmission and mandatory shift toward digital broadcasting. But it's the urge of these 'accidental' documentarists that intrigues me most, conditioned, no doubt, by decades of postmodern media convention, or, perhaps, it's the whiff of something a touch more sinister...
Thursday, June 18, 2009
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Tie Xi District Revisited
Author of the recent book, Militant Modernism, and all-round constructivist dynamo, Owen Hatherley, casts his eye over Wang Bing's West of the Tracks, here. After placing Wang's documentary alongside other examples of 'industrial film,' citing Dziga Vertov and Viktor Turin along the way, Owen brings its subject into proximity with more familiar examples of post-industrial decline: 'So when, as a Westerner, I watch the destruction of the Tie Xi district, it's impossible not to think of what was done in the 1980s to South Wales, to Sheffield, to the East End, Detroit, Ohio.' I like this angle, since this familiarity certainly does give the film ample non-diegetic heft, but, also, it's a good way of slicing through temptations to exoticize what's before the lens – what I've found tarnishes some of Pedro Costa's works, for example. Anyway, it's recommended reading.
Friday, June 5, 2009
RIP Shek Kin
Another legend has passed. Best known best outside of Chinese language film for his role opposite Bruce Lee in Enter The Dragon, Shek Kin played, perennially, the villain in most of his film and TV roles. A unique continuity that – owing to the sheer time-span and synchronous rise of Chinese language film – generated around him that elusive authenticity of star quality. From my own recollections, it was his unmistakable face, poised between feral malevolence and high intelligence in seeming permanence, that will be imprinted into memory the most. That and his "widow's peak" which always always seemed to have been there, even as a young-ish no.1 bad guy. But sometimes that is the trait of a screen legend, less a memory of how an figure evolves from role to role, rather how singular they are; where a name or face marks an irreplaceable absence. See also Softfilm's tribute.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
oh, and the new blog
In a bid to soothe the sometimes jarring aporia of this blog, FTIN has jettisoned the more theoretical/aesthetic postings to its new colder and all together more minimal (contradiction in terms?) cousin: Nothing to be done. For those interested, there, distanced from the culturalist orientation of this blog, I hope to collect and build some thoughts towards the inaesthetics I've briefly mentioned before.
Fidelity to confusion: Tiananmen 6/4
While it is important to remember the presence of democratic and liberal lobbyist actions at the Tiananmen protests twenty years ago today. It is even more imperative to acknowledge the heterogeneity, and diverse nature of intentions forming the multitudes that eventually faced the same brutal oppressive fate. This is precisely what is absent in reports such as this one by James Miles in the BBC today – ironically, itself a piece on the difficulty of reporting on 6/4 –, which reduces the complexity of the protests down to a singular, therefore, fictive, notion: that Tiananmen was entirely an explosion of "pro-democracy" sentiment. In a valid comment from James Kynge – published surprisingly in the FT – Kynge writes:
Almost everything fell within its scope: campaigns against corruption, nepotism, inflation, police brutality, bureaucracy, official privilege, media censorship, human rights abuses, cramped student dormitories and the smothering of democratic urges. But to say the demonstrations were to “demand democracy” is an oversimplification.
The truth is that the students in the square had only the haziest understanding of western-style democracy. To the extent that the protests were directed at abuses of an existing system by an emerging elite, they were motivated more by outrage at the betrayal of socialist ideals than by aspirations for a new system. The mood in the square was at least as much conservative as it was activist.
Such arguments may seem arcane two decades later. But, in my view, they are keenly relevant. The styling of Tiananmen as a pro-democracy movement helped to miscast the west’s narrative on China’s past and future.
This reminds us, again, of the dissension between historiography – grand hegemonic historical narratives – and that of historiology – its counter-memory. As Kynge points out, it is the former of these two that mainstream media – particularly in the West, though Eastern media are also prone – have a tendency to inaccurately reaffirm. Likely to be the highest profile cinematic representation of this negligible sort is Lou Ye's Summer Palace. Which, like many contemporary journalistic accounts of the protests, focused exclusively – in its absurdly indulgent sexed-up narrative – on the pro-democracy student, and future intellectual contingent. Firmly outside of the spotlight were the wider groups of workers that travelled to protest against Deng Xiaoping's marketization reforms and the growing abyss between the increasingly rich and continually poor; absolutely removed from calls for Western styled capitalo-parliamentarianism and against the embrace of neoliberalism.
The paradoxical nature of the Tiananment event finds its best critic in Wang Hui – who's absence from this year's Birkbeck conference was sorely missed [Infinite Thought's notes]. And who's essay Alternative Globalizations and the Question of the Modern, I quote, for its fidelity to the protest's original economic underpinnings:
It is to lamentable that incontestable facts are being overlooked only two decades on. The events which are better and more accurately characterized by an intense confusion, should be faithfully preserved for later memory as being precisely that; the clash of unformed ideals rather than clearly organized unrest – regardless of the beholder's own position on the matter. Whether this can be explained either by mere sloppy journalism or more ideological reasons, however, warrants further scrutiny.
Img: Yue Minjun's Execution (1995)
The paradoxical nature of the Tiananment event finds its best critic in Wang Hui – who's absence from this year's Birkbeck conference was sorely missed [Infinite Thought's notes]. And who's essay Alternative Globalizations and the Question of the Modern, I quote, for its fidelity to the protest's original economic underpinnings:
...the year 1989 can be regarded as a time of a temporary suspension of the process of Chinese market reform. This suspension coincided with the period of policy adjustments undertaken by the state in its response to the first round of crises at that time, and also as a necessary preparatory stage in the further expansion of markets. This fact is pregnant with rich historical and theoretical implication. First, market expansion took the form of coercive intervention by the state, and because of this, the notion of a binary market/state opposition was shattered. After June of that year, those who thought that the movement had speeded up the process of Chinese democratic reform discovered that they had been abruptly dragged back into an era they thought was passing away – the old language, old patterns, old characters, old announcements, and old faces that should have retired from the scene all took the stage once again. These old patterns created a hallucinatory effect, such that no one became conscious of the fact that the actual function of the repressive measures was precisely to reestablish the links among market mechanisms that had begun to fail. Nor did anyone reckon that violent repression and the reactionary period that followed would provide moral legitimacy for the creation of an era of markets. Just as people have forgotten the sound of social fragmentation echoing behind the excitement at Tiananmen, neither can people remember that the market era referred today as "neoliberalsm" is hiding behind the political specters of the past era are today's stage properties. The old violence and the old language have conferred on the present era of dramatic polarization a reputation for being progressive. (p.116-7)
It is to lamentable that incontestable facts are being overlooked only two decades on. The events which are better and more accurately characterized by an intense confusion, should be faithfully preserved for later memory as being precisely that; the clash of unformed ideals rather than clearly organized unrest – regardless of the beholder's own position on the matter. Whether this can be explained either by mere sloppy journalism or more ideological reasons, however, warrants further scrutiny.
Img: Yue Minjun's Execution (1995)
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
May 4th in 2009.
Illustration: Zhang Shihao
Depicted figures from L-R (Hu Shi, Chen Duxiu, Cai Yuanpei, Lu Xun).
From Danwei.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
ISD#8 Youthful A-go-go
This one will surely keep Softfilm happy, as it should everyone else!..a youthful Connie Chan performing the "youthful a-go-go" in a suitably carefree stylee. And as per usual, thanks to HongKongInThe50s for these little treasures.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Event: CCD Workstation May Festival
An exciting looking event in Beijing, full details on the CCD Workstation site:
27 April to 5 May, 2009
Organizer: Caochangdi Workstation/ Living Dance Studio
Co-organizers: Beijing Storm, BORNEOCO/ CultureXpress, The Netherlands
This year marks the 4th continuous year of Caochangdi’s “May Festival”. As before, the festival will feature two main components: Performance Space and a Film Forum. The Performance Space segment will include the 8 newest works from the 2009 Young Choreographers’ Project. The choreographers of these 8 pieces come from Beijing, Shanghai, Wuxi, and Tianjin, and are mostly under 30 years of age. The works demonstrate the artists’ first forays into creating independent performance art and choreography, though many of them are already performers, or have participated or performed in previous Young Choreographers’ Projects. May is a time of youth; our hope is, in the 4th year of the Young Choreographers’ Project, these even more youthful performers will bring us a breath of fresh air.
Our “Documentary Forum” will also follow the form of previous years. The new films from the Villager Documentary Project are highly recommended. Since the Project began at Caochangdi in 2005, it continued with the villagers’ first feature length documentaries, all titled “My Village 2006”. This year, their second films, titled “My Village 2007” will be screened here once again. In addition, the “New Works of Independent Documentary in China” and “Student Short Films” segments will continue on as part of our Film Forum. Following the success of screening Peter Liechti’s films at our “Crossing Festival” in October, we will be collaborating once again with Swiss Films, and under their generous support have been able to invite another Swiss director, Edna Politi, to screen her films.
Providing opportunities for training and discussion regarding creative processes has always been our top priority at Caochangdi. This year, the Village Documentary directors will take part in editing workshops from the beginning to the end of April, during which they will finalize the edits for their newest films. Swiss director Edna Politi will also host a five-day Documentary Workshop, offering direction for rough cuts of new films submitted by new documentary directors.
l PERFORMANCE SPACE ·YOUNG CHOREOGRAPHERS’ PROJECT, 2009
★Productions Group A (four works)
Time & date: 20:00, April 27 (Mon.), 28 (Tue.)
Village’s Doctor
Choreographer: Gong Zhonghui, Performers: Gong Zhonghui, Zhang Li
Moon
Choreographer/performer: Sharina
Catabolism Equation X
Choreographer: Wang Ting, Performers: Wang Ting, Wu Lichun
Light, Bright
Choreographers: Li Zhen, Zang Ningbei, Performers: Li Zhen, Zang Ningbei
★Productions Group B (four works)
Time & date: 20:00, April 30 (Thu.), May 1 (Fri.)
A Reality That Dreams Cannot Capture
Choreographer: Lei Yan; Performers: Lei Yan, Lian Guodong
Battle
Choreographer: Jiang Fan, Performers: Jiang Fan, Yang Jing
Ouroboros
Choreographer: Xiao Chen; Performers: Xiao Chen, Xiongying Lina, Xiao Wei
Self-portrait and Dialogue with My Mother
Choreographer/performer: Zhang Mengqi
★Villager Documentary Project
My Village in 2007 (70 mins./2008), screen on 19:30, May 2
Directed, filmed, edited by Shao Yuzhen
My Village in 2007 (75 mins./2008) , screen on 14:30, May 3
Directed, filmed, edited by Wang Wei
My Village in 2007 (80 mins./2008) , screen on 14:00, May 4
Directed, filmed, edited by Zhang Huancai
My Village in 2006 (75 mins./2008) , screen on 19:30, May 5
Directed, filmed, edited by Jia Zhitan
My Village in 2007 (80 mins./2008) , screen on 21:00, May 5
Directed, filmed, edited by Jia Zhitan
★New Works in Documentary Film
Sister Heaven Sister Earth , screen on 19:30, May 3
Director: Leslie Tai; Length: 103 minutes ; Production: 2008
Disorder , screen on 13:00, May 5
Director: Huang Weikai; Length: 58 minutes; Production: 2008
★Filmmaker in Focus: Edna Politi (Switzerland)
SHADOWS screen on 13:30, May 1
THE QUARTET OF THE POSSIBLES screen on 13:30, May 2
KURTAG – FRAGMENTE, Part /3 screen on 13:00, May 3
THE DAUGHTERSOF UTOPIA screen on 19:30, May 4
★EXPERIMENTAL AND SHORT STUDENT VIDEO SCREENINGS screen on 13:00, May 4
Public Space (the group of short film); My Grandma (12 min); Private Garden (5 min）
Hu Fusheng (5 min); Old People (25 min)
★Documentary Workshop, conducted by Edna Politi (Switzerland）
8 participants and the documentaries (in draft cutting) of the workshop
Activity & Schedule of the Documentary Workshop
10:00 to 10:30, May 1th: opening & introduction
10:30 to 12:30, May 1th: screen film of participant #1 & discussing
16:00 to 18:00, May 1th: screen film of participant #2 & discussing
10:00 to 12:00, May 2th: screen film of participant #3 & discussing
16:00 to 18:00, May 2th: screen film of participant #4 & discussing
10:00 to 12:00, May 3th: screen film of participant #5 & discussing
16:00 to 18:00, May 3th: screen film of participant #6 & discussing
10:00 to 12:00, May 4th: screen film of participant #7 & discussing
16:00 to 18:00, May 4th: screen film of participant #8 & discussing
10:00 to 12:00, May 5th: more discussing
16:00 to 18:00, May 5th: more discussing
l Seminars and Feedback Sessions
★Seminar: Discussing & Feedback of Program A of Young Choreographers Project (all groups together) Time and date: 10:30, April 28, Tue.
Conducted by: Tian Gebing, Zhang Xian
Present: all choreographers and dancers of YCP 2009
Inviting: Wang Yanan, He Yufan, Li Jianjun, Estelle Zheng
★Seminar: Discussing & Feedback of Program A of Young Choreographers Project (individual) Time and date: 14:00, April 28, Tue.
Conducted by: Tian Gebing, Zhang Xian
Present: all choreographers and dancers of YCP 2009
Invitng: Wang Yanan, He Yufan, Li Jianjun, Estelle Zheng
★Seminar: Creation and Continuation of Young Dance Theater (focus on works of three choreographers) Time and date: 13:30, April 30, Mon.
Conducted by: Wu Wenguang
Present: Wang Yanan, He Yufan, Li Jianjun
Inviting: Wen Hui, Tian Gebing, Zhang Xian
Seminar: Discussing & Feedback of Program A of Young Choreographers Project (individual) Time and date: 16:00, April 29, Wed.
Conducted by: Tian Gebing, Zhang Xian
Present: all choreographers and dancers of YCP 2009
Inviting: Wang Yanan, He Yufan, Li Jianjun, Estelle Zheng
★Seminar: Dance Creation and Social Reality (focus on works of Living Dance Studio)
Time and date: 13:30, April 30, Thu.
Conducted by: Tian Gebing
Present: Wen Hui
★Seminar: Discussing & Feedback of Program B of Young Choreographers Project (all groups together) Time and date: 10:30, May 1, Fri.
Conducted by: Tian Gebing, Zhang Xian
Present: all choreographers and dancers of YCP 2009
Inviting: Wang Yanan, He Yufan, Li Jianjun, Estelle Zheng
Seminar: Discussing & Feedback of Program B of Young Choreographers Project (individual) Time and date: 15:00, May 1, Fri.
Conducted by: Tian Gebing, Zhang Xian
Present: all choreographers and dancers of YCP 2009
Inviting: Wang Yanan, He Yufan, Li Jianjun, Estelle Zheng
Seminar: Discussing & Feedback of Program B of Young Choreographers Project (individual)
Time and date: 16:00, May 2, Fri.
Conducted by: Tian Gebing, Zhang Xian
Present: all choreographers and dancers of YCP 2009
Inviting: Wang Yanan, He Yufan, Li Jianjun, Estelle Zheng
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Guns and Masculinity: Better Luck Tomorrow
I Guns and Masculinity: Better Luck Tomorrow (Justin Lin, 2003)
Parodic or non-parodic, mainstream or non-mainstream, Asian American cinema or cinema by Americans of Asian descent, Better Luck Tomorrow is a film about social inclusion (or exclusion) and the trials of gaining acceptance amongst peers. Moreover, the film expresses this theme chiefly as a "crisis of masculinity," but expands (albeit for one character) its mono-gendered parameters to include representations of female subjectivity in its drama: it is a film about agency, and simply the capacity to make the things one wants happen whether others allow it or otherwise.
The film makes extensive usage of symbols. And this brief analysis recounts its employment of guns as a recurring symbol of agency or subjectivity throughout its narrative.
There are several ways of linking guns to the notion of agency…
Perhaps the most intuitive way is through the Freudian idea of phallic symbolism; or as Susie McKellar puts it,
Admittedly this is a chauvinistic theory, however, by and large it finds compatibility with the film’s libidinal imperative since it also has few reservations over privileging representations of “male dominance” and “masculine power.” Indeed, other than Stephanie – the archetypal female object of desire – female characters are entirely one-dimensional: the prostitute that serves only to relieve Ben of his virginity; the woman in the car park with a memorable “rack”; the various other nameless females that frolic topless for the titillation of the male gaze…and so forth…
Beyond the dimension of lust, however, phallic symbolism also finds some import with the film’s other more violent dimension: the dimension of terror. Douglas Kellner (author of Tough Guise: Violence, Media and the Crisis In Masculinity) believes that even the high-profiled massacres of Columbine High School and Virginia Tech were not outbreaks of spontaneous “mental illness” or “life imitating art (or film)” as the media reported it, but precisely as expressions of masculinity in crisis. Or as Kellner elaborated in an interview:
The contours of this theory remain relevant to the characters of Ben and his small band of brothers Daric, Han and Virgil, despite the tame level of violence they exert in comparison to that at Columbine or Virginia Tech. And the possible socio-economic factor (less economic more social) identifiable for them is their ethnicity as Asian Americans. It is recognition of their agency, collectively or individually, in spite of ethnic markers that they seek to grab through force or terror. Their enactment of terror in some ways can be read as superficial, however, such a reading misses the point, the nature of terror itself. That is, that terror capitalizes less on the dimension of actual acts of violence on particular subjects but finds its true efficacy or agency in its symbolic dimension; the fear wielded by its perpetrators in precisely the potential (or threat) of further but as yet uncommitted violence. Whether or not this type of agency is a sustainable or even considerable as an actual agency remains open to debate, but it continues to have vulgar use by actants in non-fictional and fictional worlds alike.
The gun, then, serves as a physical incarnation of this empowerment, bestowing upon its owner instantaneous agency where he/she had none.
We see the gun as a motif emerge again and again in the film for this singular purpose, varying only in degrees of threat and danger.
It is possible to argue that the gun loosely plots the trajectory – forming an index – of the characters’ progress in proportion to their sense of agency over three diegetic stages:
i (14”) and (56”) From not having any agency and wishing for it, especially for Stephanie;
ii (37”) and (1’07”) to finally getting some and reveling in it;
iii (39”), (1’19”) and (1’28”) then reaching the limits of agency and eventually losing its control.
The film makes extensive usage of symbols. And this brief analysis recounts its employment of guns as a recurring symbol of agency or subjectivity throughout its narrative.
There are several ways of linking guns to the notion of agency…
Perhaps the most intuitive way is through the Freudian idea of phallic symbolism; or as Susie McKellar puts it,
‘“weapons are phallic symbols representing male dominance and masculine power, and regard ‘the need for a gun as serving for libidinal purposes … to enhance or repair a damaged self-image … and involving narcissism … [p]assivity or insecurity’” (p. 70)
Admittedly this is a chauvinistic theory, however, by and large it finds compatibility with the film’s libidinal imperative since it also has few reservations over privileging representations of “male dominance” and “masculine power.” Indeed, other than Stephanie – the archetypal female object of desire – female characters are entirely one-dimensional: the prostitute that serves only to relieve Ben of his virginity; the woman in the car park with a memorable “rack”; the various other nameless females that frolic topless for the titillation of the male gaze…and so forth…
Beyond the dimension of lust, however, phallic symbolism also finds some import with the film’s other more violent dimension: the dimension of terror. Douglas Kellner (author of Tough Guise: Violence, Media and the Crisis In Masculinity) believes that even the high-profiled massacres of Columbine High School and Virginia Tech were not outbreaks of spontaneous “mental illness” or “life imitating art (or film)” as the media reported it, but precisely as expressions of masculinity in crisis. Or as Kellner elaborated in an interview:
By a “crisis in masculinity,” I mean a dominant societal connection between masculinity and being a tough guy, … a “tough guise,” a mask or façade of violent assertiveness, covering over vulnerabilities. The crisis erupts in outbreaks of violence and societal murder, as men act out rage, which takes extremely violent forms such as political assassinations, serial and mass murders, and school and workplace shootings – all exhibiting guys and guns amok. The crisis in masculinity is grounded in deteriorating socio-economic possibilities for men and is aggravated by our current economic crisis.
The contours of this theory remain relevant to the characters of Ben and his small band of brothers Daric, Han and Virgil, despite the tame level of violence they exert in comparison to that at Columbine or Virginia Tech. And the possible socio-economic factor (less economic more social) identifiable for them is their ethnicity as Asian Americans. It is recognition of their agency, collectively or individually, in spite of ethnic markers that they seek to grab through force or terror. Their enactment of terror in some ways can be read as superficial, however, such a reading misses the point, the nature of terror itself. That is, that terror capitalizes less on the dimension of actual acts of violence on particular subjects but finds its true efficacy or agency in its symbolic dimension; the fear wielded by its perpetrators in precisely the potential (or threat) of further but as yet uncommitted violence. Whether or not this type of agency is a sustainable or even considerable as an actual agency remains open to debate, but it continues to have vulgar use by actants in non-fictional and fictional worlds alike.The gun, then, serves as a physical incarnation of this empowerment, bestowing upon its owner instantaneous agency where he/she had none.
We see the gun as a motif emerge again and again in the film for this singular purpose, varying only in degrees of threat and danger.
It is possible to argue that the gun loosely plots the trajectory – forming an index – of the characters’ progress in proportion to their sense of agency over three diegetic stages:
i (14”) and (56”) From not having any agency and wishing for it, especially for Stephanie;
ii (37”) and (1’07”) to finally getting some and reveling in it;
iii (39”), (1’19”) and (1’28”) then reaching the limits of agency and eventually losing its control.
II Index of Gun references in Better Luck Tomorrow
(14”) What do you want to be when you grow up?
Whilst waiting for her Boyfriend (Steve) to arrive, Stephanie and Ben talk about their future hopes and aspirations on life beyond college: what they would do if they could – or, how they envision themselves with a realised sense of agency. Ben declares his as being a pro-basketball player – in spite of Stephanie’s reservations: being “too short.” To which he replies ironically, “we’re only as big as our hearts.” Stephanie’s is equally surprising – a cop –, but in reply to the same reservation she quickly retorts: “not if you have one of these” mimicking a gun to Ben’s face with her empty hands. Even the cartoonish suggestion of violence here has an arresting effect.
(37”) Confronting the jock
Having crashed a house party, Ben, Daric, Virgil, and Han encounter a loud-mouthed jock hurling racist insults. Daric squares up to the jock. Pushing and shoving erupts in physical violence. Initially they trade punches to the face, from which the jock seems to gain an upper hand. The on-lookers only goad Daric more. Pigheadedly, Daric pulls a real pistol on the jock, a gratuitous threat that wins him the alpha-male contest. The on-lookers disperse in panic. Milking their crowning moment, their symbolic arrival at the top of their social hierarchy, Daric and co. hand out a group kicking to the already defenseless jock. This is the turning point for the boys, who command less agency than they perhaps think.
(39”) Meeting real gangsters
Driving away from the scene of their victory, they chance upon another group of thugs. All but Virgil are silent as they ponder the consequences of their actions on their lives to a tinny-sounding hip-hop track. As Virgil babbles obliviously in an empty adrenalized daze, the intimidating thugs pull up alongside of them sneering and gesticulating. The thugs exude a vastly superior presence. This superiority is signified not only by the “weight” of their in-car soundtrack, a throbbing G-funk emitting a noticeably heavier low-end to theirs, but also by their driver’s brandishing of an Uzi submachine gun. Swallowing their pride, they choose not to react to the thugs’ provocations. The encounter reminds them of their true status as opportunists, and the risky game of feigning power.
(53”) Birthday gift
Alarmed by the increasingly chaotic lifestyle he has brought on himself, Ben announces to his cohorts that he “wants out.” Without any resistance to his suggestion, Daric agrees, and furthermore joins Ben in quitting the cheat-sheet racket on account of the project having “turned into a job.” And for a birthday gift, Daric and the others give to Ben a pistol of his own, complete with a leather presentation box. Virgil exploits the opportunity to seize control of the racket, asking his cousin Han to continue helping him. With Daric agreeing to this transfer of responsibility, Virgil reveals he has an identical gun to Ben; recklessly tossing the pistol in the air, the group disperse leaving Virgil and his showing-off antics to himself. The scene suggests that anyone can hold a gun.
(56”) Taking games seriously
Curious to learn the secret of shooting basketball 3-pointers while hanging out, Stephanie receives pointers from Ben on a quiet court. Nonchalantly, Stephanie scores on her first attempt. After a brief insert of the two eating cookies, carefree. There is a shallow focus tracking-in shot of Stephanie’s resolute expression as they play video games at an arcade; both her and Ben are shooting its guns at off-screen targets. The angle and composition of the shot reprises that of Stephanie’s when she gestured it with her hands at (14’). The scene intimates that Stephanie is more interested in the ends of agency than its means or techniques alone.
(1’07”) Sex with violence
Ben and the boys take time off from their worries with a hedonistic excursus to Las Vegas. In addition to gambling, watching hotel supplied pornography, and boozing; the boys dabble in a spot of whoring, splitting the costs of a single prostitute. Euphorically, Ben looses his virginity to her. Their shared excitement in coming-of-age together quickly turns sour as the prostitute flees from Virgil, who pulled his gun on her. For remonstrating against Virgil’s excessiveness, Han becomes the next target of Virgil; aiming the gun to his head, Ben and Daric are powerless in stopping Virgil force Han to back down. Han concedes, and swallows his pride leaving the hotel. The scene demonstrates the danger of fetishizing power in itself, finding its symbol in a gun-toting Virgil stood in his underpants: the naked difference between real potency and assisted potency become apparent.
(1’19”) Bungled Ambush
Expecting to receive the semi-automatic firearm that he paid upfront for, Steve meets Daric, Han, and Virgil in a claustrophobic garage behind a house party. They close in on him in ambush. Attempting to “wake” Steve up from his desire to punish his parents, an ensuing scuffle takes an unexpected turn. Steve claims Virgil’s gun as it is tossed to the ground. A shot is fired as they wrestle for control. Hearing it, Ben arrives to intervene. Ben disarms Steve with a baseball bat, and then in a cathartic moment of confusion and resentment (long-harboured desire for Stephanie) he bats Steve’s head to a bloody pulp. Eventually Steve is killed and is buried in a garden.
(1’ 28”) Virgil’s Suicide Attempt
Unable to cope with the situation, Virgil turns his gun on himself. The incident leaves him badly maimed and comatose. Differences resolved, Han stands by him sitting patiently beside his hospital bed.
III Feminine Agency: A Better Way?
Denouement
The film’s final scene is a variation of the masculine phallic symbol, one that finds it upside down in an exhibition of a feminine phallus. After an indefinite truncation of time, signified by the fade in from black, Stephanie pulls up in her impressive new car (an Audi TT). Its considerable phallic symbolism does not go unnoticed by Ben, who quietly utters to himself “nice!” Despite the violence, notoriety, and company Ben once had, his agency is firmly returned to what little he had at the start of the film. Whereas Stephanie, it is hinted, has succeeded in a slower but steadier rise to where she wanted to get to: she was once waiting for Steve to pick her up from college but now it is her offering Ben a lift. The ultimate evidence of this reversal is Stephanie’s active role in kissing a passive Ben, shattering the myth of a “male dominance and masculine power” once and for all, and inverting the most familiar “getting the girl” scenario. An inversion that hints that perhaps there are more viable and less hazardous alternatives to achieve agency in a world where it is still largely equated with masculine potency.
[Notes from a presentation recently given]
(14”) What do you want to be when you grow up?
Whilst waiting for her Boyfriend (Steve) to arrive, Stephanie and Ben talk about their future hopes and aspirations on life beyond college: what they would do if they could – or, how they envision themselves with a realised sense of agency. Ben declares his as being a pro-basketball player – in spite of Stephanie’s reservations: being “too short.” To which he replies ironically, “we’re only as big as our hearts.” Stephanie’s is equally surprising – a cop –, but in reply to the same reservation she quickly retorts: “not if you have one of these” mimicking a gun to Ben’s face with her empty hands. Even the cartoonish suggestion of violence here has an arresting effect.
(37”) Confronting the jock
Having crashed a house party, Ben, Daric, Virgil, and Han encounter a loud-mouthed jock hurling racist insults. Daric squares up to the jock. Pushing and shoving erupts in physical violence. Initially they trade punches to the face, from which the jock seems to gain an upper hand. The on-lookers only goad Daric more. Pigheadedly, Daric pulls a real pistol on the jock, a gratuitous threat that wins him the alpha-male contest. The on-lookers disperse in panic. Milking their crowning moment, their symbolic arrival at the top of their social hierarchy, Daric and co. hand out a group kicking to the already defenseless jock. This is the turning point for the boys, who command less agency than they perhaps think.
(39”) Meeting real gangsters
Driving away from the scene of their victory, they chance upon another group of thugs. All but Virgil are silent as they ponder the consequences of their actions on their lives to a tinny-sounding hip-hop track. As Virgil babbles obliviously in an empty adrenalized daze, the intimidating thugs pull up alongside of them sneering and gesticulating. The thugs exude a vastly superior presence. This superiority is signified not only by the “weight” of their in-car soundtrack, a throbbing G-funk emitting a noticeably heavier low-end to theirs, but also by their driver’s brandishing of an Uzi submachine gun. Swallowing their pride, they choose not to react to the thugs’ provocations. The encounter reminds them of their true status as opportunists, and the risky game of feigning power.
(53”) Birthday gift
Alarmed by the increasingly chaotic lifestyle he has brought on himself, Ben announces to his cohorts that he “wants out.” Without any resistance to his suggestion, Daric agrees, and furthermore joins Ben in quitting the cheat-sheet racket on account of the project having “turned into a job.” And for a birthday gift, Daric and the others give to Ben a pistol of his own, complete with a leather presentation box. Virgil exploits the opportunity to seize control of the racket, asking his cousin Han to continue helping him. With Daric agreeing to this transfer of responsibility, Virgil reveals he has an identical gun to Ben; recklessly tossing the pistol in the air, the group disperse leaving Virgil and his showing-off antics to himself. The scene suggests that anyone can hold a gun.
(56”) Taking games seriously
Curious to learn the secret of shooting basketball 3-pointers while hanging out, Stephanie receives pointers from Ben on a quiet court. Nonchalantly, Stephanie scores on her first attempt. After a brief insert of the two eating cookies, carefree. There is a shallow focus tracking-in shot of Stephanie’s resolute expression as they play video games at an arcade; both her and Ben are shooting its guns at off-screen targets. The angle and composition of the shot reprises that of Stephanie’s when she gestured it with her hands at (14’). The scene intimates that Stephanie is more interested in the ends of agency than its means or techniques alone.
(1’07”) Sex with violence
Ben and the boys take time off from their worries with a hedonistic excursus to Las Vegas. In addition to gambling, watching hotel supplied pornography, and boozing; the boys dabble in a spot of whoring, splitting the costs of a single prostitute. Euphorically, Ben looses his virginity to her. Their shared excitement in coming-of-age together quickly turns sour as the prostitute flees from Virgil, who pulled his gun on her. For remonstrating against Virgil’s excessiveness, Han becomes the next target of Virgil; aiming the gun to his head, Ben and Daric are powerless in stopping Virgil force Han to back down. Han concedes, and swallows his pride leaving the hotel. The scene demonstrates the danger of fetishizing power in itself, finding its symbol in a gun-toting Virgil stood in his underpants: the naked difference between real potency and assisted potency become apparent.
(1’19”) Bungled Ambush
Expecting to receive the semi-automatic firearm that he paid upfront for, Steve meets Daric, Han, and Virgil in a claustrophobic garage behind a house party. They close in on him in ambush. Attempting to “wake” Steve up from his desire to punish his parents, an ensuing scuffle takes an unexpected turn. Steve claims Virgil’s gun as it is tossed to the ground. A shot is fired as they wrestle for control. Hearing it, Ben arrives to intervene. Ben disarms Steve with a baseball bat, and then in a cathartic moment of confusion and resentment (long-harboured desire for Stephanie) he bats Steve’s head to a bloody pulp. Eventually Steve is killed and is buried in a garden.
(1’ 28”) Virgil’s Suicide Attempt
Unable to cope with the situation, Virgil turns his gun on himself. The incident leaves him badly maimed and comatose. Differences resolved, Han stands by him sitting patiently beside his hospital bed.
III Feminine Agency: A Better Way?
Kiss your male dominance goodbye
Denouement
The film’s final scene is a variation of the masculine phallic symbol, one that finds it upside down in an exhibition of a feminine phallus. After an indefinite truncation of time, signified by the fade in from black, Stephanie pulls up in her impressive new car (an Audi TT). Its considerable phallic symbolism does not go unnoticed by Ben, who quietly utters to himself “nice!” Despite the violence, notoriety, and company Ben once had, his agency is firmly returned to what little he had at the start of the film. Whereas Stephanie, it is hinted, has succeeded in a slower but steadier rise to where she wanted to get to: she was once waiting for Steve to pick her up from college but now it is her offering Ben a lift. The ultimate evidence of this reversal is Stephanie’s active role in kissing a passive Ben, shattering the myth of a “male dominance and masculine power” once and for all, and inverting the most familiar “getting the girl” scenario. An inversion that hints that perhaps there are more viable and less hazardous alternatives to achieve agency in a world where it is still largely equated with masculine potency.
[Notes from a presentation recently given]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
