Oppositional Cinemas
Course Description
There is no such thing as an inherently “oppositional cinema”; rather, “oppositional cinemas” arise and are defined in relationship to historically shifting socio-cultural, political and economic contexts. Accordingly, this class will explore a range of film genres and movements whose stylistic systems and modes of production deviate from, and in some cases directly challenge, those of the perceived dominant cinema, notably mainstream Hollywood. Our primary concern will be to gain a sense of how these “oppositional cinemas” both challenge mainstream Hollywood practice and, in the process, potentially function for the greater purpose of cultural critique and social transformation.
Course Format
Most of us are familiar with film culture. And so it might seem like any kind of theoretical introduction to film is unnecessary. We all “get” movies, right? We all react to them, we interpret them, and, most of the time, we make critical judgments about them.
However, it is also the case that, as film theorist Christian Metz once put it, “a film is difficult to explain because it is easy to understand.” What Metz was referring to here was the fact that the conventional ways most of us watch movies—for example, trying to follow the plot, anticipating what’s going to happen next, or, conversely, zoning in and out while the movie plays out in front of us—do not necessarily suit the demands for critical analysis. For instance, we don’t usually think about how films are put together while we watch them. Yet the idea that most films seem “obvious” to us can distract from the codes and conventions that ultimately guide our understanding and viewing pleasure. By “constructing” films differently, “oppositional cinemas” attempt to make us aware of this very fact; and in doing so, afford us alternative ways of making sense of the “reality” that is being represented.
This course thus revolves around precisely this issue of cinematic representation, and it is divided into two parts: the first part hinges on questions of narrative style—or how stories get told—while the second part focuses on issues of spectatorship—or how audiences are addressed and offered different “ways of seeing” vis-à-vis film texts. Overall, our task will be one of de-familiarizing the structures and conventions that underpin “normal” modes of cinematic representation, while also considering the possible (aesthetic, social, political) consequences potentially fostered by alternative types of cinema.
Readings
The readings for the course are available in Portable Document Format (PDF) on WebVista, which can be accessed directly via the following URL: https://www2.webvista.umn.edu/webct/logon/305867374041 or indirectly through the myU Portal (http://myu.umn.edu) under the “my courses” tab. (In order to view and print these files in the PDF format, you will need Adobe’s Reader. If you do not have Reader, you can download and install it for free at the Adobe.com website (http://get.adobe.com/reader/). If you are unable to access the readings and/or WebVista page, please notify me immediately.)
Much of your grade for the course will depend on how well and how close you engage with the readings. For this reason, it is essential that you:
Complete the assigned readings BEFORE coming to class
Arrive prepared to discuss and ASK QUESTIONS about the readings
Print out your own hard copies and BRING THE READINGS TO CLASS.
Although the reading load for the course is relatively light (avg. 40-70 pp./week), the level of difficulty of the readings is particularly high (especially if you’re new to the discipline of film studies). Many of the authors employ sophisticated theoretical arguments to support their analyses of particular films texts, styles, and practices. It is therefore incumbent upon everyone to read the material carefully and closely, knowing full well that THINGS WILL HAVE TO BE RE-READ. Once is not enough for a lot of these texts. Also, READ WITH A PEN IN HAND. Every time you feel compelled to underline something, do it. Use the margins to highlight key points and concepts, or, better yet, to ask questions (e.g. why is this passage important? What is the author arguing here? What does s/he mean by this or that concept?) In other words, “get your hands dirty” with these readings. The better notes you take, the more prepared you’ll be for in-class exams.
Requirements
15% Attendance/Participation (class discussion, viewing questions)
15% Screening Journals
20% Reader Responses
25% First Exam
25% Second Exam
Attendance/Participation
Attendance and participation is required. I will take attendance regularly. More than three unexcused absences will result in a full letter grade deduction toward your final grade; more than four unexcused absences will result in failing the course. Also, participation during class discussions is necessary and essential. To do well in the class, you must not only show up, but also engage and contribute to group discussions.
Screening Journals
For each full-length screening in class (13 total), students are required to draft a short review. Responses needn’t be longer than a few paragraphs and should reflect on the films screened by way of the corresponding reading assignments for that particular day/week. In other words, responses should not simply state your opinions about a movie (liked it, didn’t like it), but should carefully incorporate central concepts, key points and arguments from the readings in order to “think through” the films.
Also, bring your journals to class. Occasionally, these will serve as a basis for class discussion. I will collect journals at the end of the course; however, I will periodically check to see that people are keeping up with their entries. Failure to stay on task will result in a grade reduction.
Reader Responses
Throughout the course students will be required to complete and turn in four reader response assignments (you can find these on the WebVista course site in the “Reader Responses” folder). These are designed to guide you in the reading process, directing your attention to important passages, concepts, and ideas.
Exams
There will be two in-class bluebook exams. The first will cover course material (readings, in-class lecture-discussions, screenings) through week 3; the second will be cumulative with an emphasis on material from weeks 4-6. The exam format is a mixture of multiple choice, fill-in-the-blank, short answer, and essay questions. It is mandatory to take the English exam. You can study with an online tutors in the Teaching Media Community to prepare.
The exams are hard; however, they are also open note (handwritten only). That is, you may refer to your own lecture/discussion notes as well as your screening journals. Needless to say, this should motivate you to take good notes both in class and on the readings—which means you actually have to do the readings.
Class Schedule
Week 1: What is “Dominant Cinema”
6/16: Introductions
Screening: Casablanca (Michael Curtiz, 1942, 102 m)
6/17: Readings:
Hall, “The Work of Representation” (sections I-III, pp. 15-41)
Ray, “A Certain Tendency of the American Cinema”
Reader Response #1 Due
6/18: Readings:
Bordwell, “Classical Hollywood Cinema”
Clips: Casablanca (1942); His Girl Friday (Howard Hawks, 1940); The Birds (Alfred Hitchcock, 1963); Rear Window (Alfred Hitchcock, 1954); They Live (John Carpenter, 1988)
Week 2: European Art Cinema
6/23: Readings:
Hall, “The Work of Representation” (sections IV-VI, pp. 41-63)
Reader Response #2 Due
Screening: Funny Games (Michael Haneke, 1997, 108 m)
6/24: Readings:
Bordwell, “The Art Cinema as a Mode of Film Practice”
Reader Response #3 Due
Screening: The Seventh Seal (Ingmar Bergman, 1957, 96 m); Pukahontas (Barney Gumble, 1995)
6/25: Readings:
Wollen, “Godard and Counter-Cinema”
Screening: Week End (Jean-Luc Godard, 1967, 105 m)
Week 3: Paracinema & Genre Cinema
6/30: Readings:
Sconce, “’Trashing the Academy: Taste, Excess, and an Emerging Politics of Cinematic Style”
Screening: Blood Feast (Herschell Gordon Lewis, 1963, 67 m)
7/1: Readings:
Wood, “An Introduction to the American Horror Film”
Screening: The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (Tobe Hooper, 1974, 83 m)
7/2: Exam 1
Week 4: Feminist and Queer Cinemas
7/7: Readings:
Mulvey, “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema”
Reader Response #4 Due
Clips: Basic Instinct (Paul Verhoeven, 1992); Tommy Boy (Peter Segal, 1995; Pretty Woman (Garry Marshall, 1990)
7/8: Readings:
Nealon & Searls Giroux, “Differences” (pp. 157-175, including the sections “Gender” & “Queer”)
Johnston, “Women’s Cinema as Counter-Cinema”
Screening: Working Girls (Lizzie Borden, 1986, 93 m)
7/9: Readings:
Doty, “There’s Something Queer Here”
DeAngelis, “The Characteristics of New Queer Filmmaking” (recommended)
Clips: The Celluloid Closet (Rob Epstein, Jeffrey Friedman, 1995)
Screening: Velvet Goldmine (Todd Haynes, 1998, 124 m)
Week 5: African American Cinema
7/14: Readings:
Guerrero, “The Rise and Fall of Blaxploitation”
Guerrero, “From Birth to Blaxploitation” (recommended)
Clips: Birth of a Nation (D.W. Griffith, 1915); Pinky (Elia Kazan, 1949); Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner (Stanely Kramer, 1967); Shaft (Gordon Parks, 1971)
Screening: Sweet Sweetback’s Baadasssss Song (Melvin Van Peebles, 1971, 97 m)
7/15: Readings:
Guerrero, “Black Film in the 1990s”
Screening: Boyz in the Hood (John Singleton, 1991, 107 m)
7/16: Readings:
Nealon & Searls Giroux, “Race”
hooks, “Eating the Other: Desire and Resistance”
Screening: Bamboozled (Spike Lee, 2000, 135 m)
Week 6: Toward a Worker’s Cinema
7/21: Reading:
Karl Marx, selected writings
Nealon & Searls Giroux, “Class”
(Rosenfelt (ed.), “Making the Film”
Screening: Salt of the Earth (Herbert J. Biberman, 1954, 94 m)
7/22: Reading:
Greene, “White Collar Revolt: Office Space”
Screening: Office Space (Mike Judge, 1999, 89 m)
7/23: Exam 2
Print 
PDF