My program is "Media and Culture in Ireland," and as such we must watch films - FILMS ABOUT IRELAND!
Showing posts with label film. Show all posts
Showing posts with label film. Show all posts
Thursday, June 3, 2010
Saturday, May 22, 2010
Academic Journal 8 - 'Dancing at Lughnasa' (Film)
On our walk home after watching the film adaptation of ‘Dancing at Lughnasa,’ Keith and I got into a discussion about the scene in which Uncle Jack encounters Rose at the back hills fire, and after a bit of unpleasantness with Danny Bradley, escorts her home. Danny coerces Rose to go with him, and is clingy and belligerent throughout, even threatening to follow her when she leaves with Jack. The entire scene is absent from the play, and her time in the hills is only mentioned briefly by Rose without any of the unpleasant overtones of the film sequence. In fact, she and Danny went up to see the “what was left of the Lughnasa fires” (59). She says that she and Danny were the only ones there, and that the experience was peaceful. Of course, she may have been lying (in the film she relates nothing of her negative experience to her sisters), but lacking any evidence from the text we are forced to take her word for it.
At first I found it odd that the director would add this scene at all, and doubly so that he would make it such a dark experience, demonizing Danny and, by extension, his cohorts at the fire and the ceremony itself. In discussion with Keith, he pointed out something that I hadn’t paid much attention to – that when Uncle Jack escorts Rose away from the fire, he appears visibly shaken, recoiling from the revelry he had until then been participating in (ostensibly as it connected with his years in Africa). Although he joined in as a happy participant, he is clearly unsettled and afraid.
Shortly after this sequence, we see Uncle Jack again – trading hats with Gerry. In this sequence, the actor plays him as lucid, completely in command of his faculties, all but recovered from his culture shock. It’s almost as if his rejection of paganism at the Lughnasa fires has led to a miraculous recovery. This doesn’t come across in the play, but with the addition of the fires sequence and the way it is handled by the director and actors, it seems to send the message that Jack’s mental troubles all stem from his fall into paganism. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the director was trying to make that the “message” of the film, but it is interesting how such a small addition to the adaptation can send a vastly different message.
At first I found it odd that the director would add this scene at all, and doubly so that he would make it such a dark experience, demonizing Danny and, by extension, his cohorts at the fire and the ceremony itself. In discussion with Keith, he pointed out something that I hadn’t paid much attention to – that when Uncle Jack escorts Rose away from the fire, he appears visibly shaken, recoiling from the revelry he had until then been participating in (ostensibly as it connected with his years in Africa). Although he joined in as a happy participant, he is clearly unsettled and afraid.
Shortly after this sequence, we see Uncle Jack again – trading hats with Gerry. In this sequence, the actor plays him as lucid, completely in command of his faculties, all but recovered from his culture shock. It’s almost as if his rejection of paganism at the Lughnasa fires has led to a miraculous recovery. This doesn’t come across in the play, but with the addition of the fires sequence and the way it is handled by the director and actors, it seems to send the message that Jack’s mental troubles all stem from his fall into paganism. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the director was trying to make that the “message” of the film, but it is interesting how such a small addition to the adaptation can send a vastly different message.
Academic Journal 5 - 'Waking Ned Devine'
I really liked this film, but I can’t help but wonder why more wasn’t done with the priest and his relationship to the townsfolk. He seems to pop in and out of the narrative without being much a part of it. He sees Morris call the seal, and is reassured by him that he has done a good job, agonizes extremely briefly about the plan to defraud the lottery commission, and performs the funeral service for Ned, but considering the length of the film he’s barely in it, as if he serves only to explain why a priest was driving along the road in time to hit the Witch’s phone box at the end of the film (I assume this is the regular priest returning, but it’s never really clarified).
Many of the characters have these fleeting moments, but theirs seem more substantive. The pub owner appears in a few short segments, but is the one who concocts the plan to open a bank account. He, along with the postmistress, help to set up the evilness of Lizzie, and the postmistress is considered an early potential winner of the lottery. Other characters only appear briefly, but the film makes a point of introducing the priest and showing that he has concerns over his performance in the town and whether the regular priest would approve of the plan. Why add this level of depth to the character if he isn’t going to play a substantive role?
I haven’t figured it out yet, but I have some ideas. Maybe he was in fact the easiest way to set up the other priest driving by in time to hit the phone box. Maybe it’s a commentary on the church focusing on morality over worldly matters (eg, the immorality of fraud vs. the benefit the money will do for the townspeople). Since he goes along with it, maybe it’s a pat on the back for religion starting to come around to the practical side of things. Combine that with the seal incident and a vague knowledge of Selkies in Irish folklore, maybe the church is also perceived as being more willing to connect with “pagan” history and life. Maybe we’re supposed to wonder if the priest is Morris' father, since he seems keen to spend time with him, although that seems unlikely since 10 that would indicate he had been the temporary priest there for some years. At the moment, I lean towards him being a useful tool to explain the priest at the end, and also perhaps to offer a bit of moral justification to the audience, point out that the director/screenwriter considered the ethical implications of what the townspeople were doing, and believes it is plausible that the clergy would go along with it.
Many of the characters have these fleeting moments, but theirs seem more substantive. The pub owner appears in a few short segments, but is the one who concocts the plan to open a bank account. He, along with the postmistress, help to set up the evilness of Lizzie, and the postmistress is considered an early potential winner of the lottery. Other characters only appear briefly, but the film makes a point of introducing the priest and showing that he has concerns over his performance in the town and whether the regular priest would approve of the plan. Why add this level of depth to the character if he isn’t going to play a substantive role?
I haven’t figured it out yet, but I have some ideas. Maybe he was in fact the easiest way to set up the other priest driving by in time to hit the phone box. Maybe it’s a commentary on the church focusing on morality over worldly matters (eg, the immorality of fraud vs. the benefit the money will do for the townspeople). Since he goes along with it, maybe it’s a pat on the back for religion starting to come around to the practical side of things. Combine that with the seal incident and a vague knowledge of Selkies in Irish folklore, maybe the church is also perceived as being more willing to connect with “pagan” history and life. Maybe we’re supposed to wonder if the priest is Morris' father, since he seems keen to spend time with him, although that seems unlikely since 10 that would indicate he had been the temporary priest there for some years. At the moment, I lean towards him being a useful tool to explain the priest at the end, and also perhaps to offer a bit of moral justification to the audience, point out that the director/screenwriter considered the ethical implications of what the townspeople were doing, and believes it is plausible that the clergy would go along with it.
Academic Journal 3 - 'My Left Foot'
I thought that the director’s decision to jump in time from the “present” of Christy’s recognition dinner and the past events of his life, all framed within the story of an attendant (who would later become his wife) reading the book he was being recognized for, to be intriguing and very successful. The vignettes between Christy and the nurse broke up some of the harsher sequences of his life story, and the change in their relationship over the course of the film seemed to mirror the viewer’s own in many ways, moving from a pitying detachment to, frankly, near-outright dislike, and finally a warming respect as his accomplishments rack up. The scenes presented are often not very complimentary towards Christy, and I think the director very much risked alienating viewers and turning them against him, but the inclusion of these interspersed moments of human interaction in the present helped keep us grounded in his humanity.
An especially interesting moment came after the suicide attempt sequence when the camera snapped back to the present focused on Christy himself, as if he had been reliving the events in his mind and was coming back to reality. What made this powerful for me was that until that point, every time that such a snap to the present had occurred it had focused around the nurse character as she read his autobiography, letting the audience see and identify with her growing admiration and fascination. I felt that it humanized Christy, who had increasingly been a notably drunk and depressed jackass, reminding the viewer that he would to some extent overcome what we were being shown. I think that it also helped to develop the relationship between the two characters as they begin to share in the story – it is no longer an artifact handed from writer to reader, but a reality that each is experiencing simultaneously (relatively speaking). Without this moment, I would have had a much harder time accepting the later relationship and future marriage, but this tiny moment of sharing and connecting made it far more plausible to me as a viewer.
An especially interesting moment came after the suicide attempt sequence when the camera snapped back to the present focused on Christy himself, as if he had been reliving the events in his mind and was coming back to reality. What made this powerful for me was that until that point, every time that such a snap to the present had occurred it had focused around the nurse character as she read his autobiography, letting the audience see and identify with her growing admiration and fascination. I felt that it humanized Christy, who had increasingly been a notably drunk and depressed jackass, reminding the viewer that he would to some extent overcome what we were being shown. I think that it also helped to develop the relationship between the two characters as they begin to share in the story – it is no longer an artifact handed from writer to reader, but a reality that each is experiencing simultaneously (relatively speaking). Without this moment, I would have had a much harder time accepting the later relationship and future marriage, but this tiny moment of sharing and connecting made it far more plausible to me as a viewer.
Academic Journal 2 - 'The Butcher Boy'
I noticed that American culture cropped up almost incidentally in this film, primarily in media clips on the television and wireless sets. Footage of nuclear testing is shown, reports on the Cuban Missile Crisis and the voice of JFK are heard, and bits of the famous “Duck and Cover’ instructional film are played during Francie’s rampage at the Nugent house. The most relatable instances I saw were in his viewing of American television shows and films on the family television.
Before his father breaks the TV, Francie is seen watching two American shows – The Lone Ranger and The Fugitive. I wonder if these specific shows are used to highlight his developing personal reality. The relationship between the Ranger and Tonto seems to parallel Francie’s perception of his relationship with Joe, and the idea of a secret crusader putting wrongs right seems to fit right in with his actions towards his perceived enemies. Francies claims of persecution and of being framed could easily match to the premise of The Prisoner, who was wrongly accused of his wife’s murder and escaped police custody to find the real perpetrator. Francie’s attempts to escape and reunite with Joe, even after Joe has pretty clearly moved on, seem almost a mish-mash of the two characters, and his turning to the visions of Mary (initially implied to be lies) a parallel for the higher calling both the Prisoner and Ranger share.
Francie is also shown watching the film The Brain from Planet Arous, an American gem about a brain-shaped alien that takes control of a human body to wreak havoc on the Earth (a second brain later arrives to reveal that the first is a wanted criminal). I think that this too connects to Francie’s development (or degeneration), not because he was in some way possessed, but because he perceives himself as a promising young man who is driven to increasingly horrific acts by forces beyond his control. Perhaps it was just me, but I really got a strong sense of inevitability form the story arc, as if what happened couldn’t have gone differently given the situation – Francie’s father, mother, friends and enemies all coming together to push him in a pre-set direction.
Before his father breaks the TV, Francie is seen watching two American shows – The Lone Ranger and The Fugitive. I wonder if these specific shows are used to highlight his developing personal reality. The relationship between the Ranger and Tonto seems to parallel Francie’s perception of his relationship with Joe, and the idea of a secret crusader putting wrongs right seems to fit right in with his actions towards his perceived enemies. Francies claims of persecution and of being framed could easily match to the premise of The Prisoner, who was wrongly accused of his wife’s murder and escaped police custody to find the real perpetrator. Francie’s attempts to escape and reunite with Joe, even after Joe has pretty clearly moved on, seem almost a mish-mash of the two characters, and his turning to the visions of Mary (initially implied to be lies) a parallel for the higher calling both the Prisoner and Ranger share.
Francie is also shown watching the film The Brain from Planet Arous, an American gem about a brain-shaped alien that takes control of a human body to wreak havoc on the Earth (a second brain later arrives to reveal that the first is a wanted criminal). I think that this too connects to Francie’s development (or degeneration), not because he was in some way possessed, but because he perceives himself as a promising young man who is driven to increasingly horrific acts by forces beyond his control. Perhaps it was just me, but I really got a strong sense of inevitability form the story arc, as if what happened couldn’t have gone differently given the situation – Francie’s father, mother, friends and enemies all coming together to push him in a pre-set direction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
