Introduction
The film is a masterpiece tackling the most controversial beliefs regarding life and reality (or even abstract thoughts). Truly, this makes the film even more compelling. It presented claims and arguments that question the grounds of man’s existence as well as the possibilities of a multi-dimensional world. It wittingly disrupted the distinction between fact and fantasy as the movie transcended the audience to cross socially and culturally defined beliefs. The movie lures the viewers to think outside the confined notions of reality and existence by illustrating possible impossibilities.
Even though film do not have an interactive audience in terms of acting as compared to theatre (Benedetti 2001, 10), it could be said that there are billions of people who watch films. They find their personalities in the portrayals of the characters and relate their life experiences to the plot of the particular movies. Also, they empathize and sympathize with the fate of the characters. Viewers delight when the characters in which they can associate themselves with are in good condition after a series of hardships and troubles. They are distressed when the character they adore dies or loses the fight (David 1990, 2-3). These are among the several reasons on why viewers who see the influences behind and surrounding filmmakers can more clearly and fully understand why films are presented in such ways.
In this epoch of globalization and modern technology, it is apparent that the need of the mainstream film audience is constantly changing and demanding. The viewers are no longer constrained with what they see on the screen but they also possess enough knowledge to comprehend and even argue with the messages that the medium provide. As the world develops, the processes inherent to humans also change. Movie viewing and its related processes are not let off. Thus, viewers already know what makes a good or bad film, or ‘smart’ or ‘dull’ film for that matter.
This paper discusses how the directors of the said films portrayed popular culture under globalisation perspective. Also, it aims to identify any remaining memory of Cinema Novo - "a camera in the hand and an idea in the head".
City of God (Cidade de Deus): Brief Facts
- Fight and you'll never survive…
Run and you'll never escape.
City of God is a story of place, Cidade de Deus, a poor housing project started in the 60's that became one of the most dangerous places in Rio de Janeiro by the beginning of the 80's.
GLOBALISATION
Globalisation in its literal sense is a social change, an increase in connections among societies and their elements due to, among others, the explosive evolution of transport and communication technologies (Hirst and Thompson 1996, 3). The term is applied to many social, cultural, commercial and economic activities. Depending on the context it can mean, it can be: (a) closer contact between different parts of the world (globalisation of the world, global village), with increasing possibilities of personal exchange and mutual understanding between "world citizens", (b) or (economic globalisation), free trade and increasing relations among members of an industry in different parts of the world (Edwards and Usher 2000, 8).
Globalisation technique in film analysis is the application of the concepts related to globalisation. This technique is general in scope and offers a wide range of application. Thus, film critics must determine the extent of application of the concepts of globalisation in connection to the content and interpretation of film’s real meaning. Modern film critics today ideally use globalisation approach to persuade viewers of different origins to watch a specified movie. The universal applicability of the film’s theme is the basic element of analysis.
More often than not, film criticism is based on the fundamentals of film and its surrounding theories. It is deliberately directed to the eventual compliance of filmmakers to the principles of film production. However, applying the argument of art in which people continuously debate on what is artistic and what is not, films are considered to cater on the sensibilities of every viewer. It is likely that a common viewer is satisfied with the fact that the film made him/her smile or affects him/her in one way or the other while the so-called sophisticated viewer tend to question the ‘this’ and ‘that’ of the film. The broad spectrum of the society covers a wide array of selective group of people from “nearly half the numbers who go to the movies today ages fewer than 25” (Biagi 1990, 147). They are the current audience. Audience is an inadequate word to determine their characteristics and influences in film. Its etymology refers to the process of hearing. Like viewers, it focuses exclusively on a single perceptual channel (Hart 1991, 30). Further, audiences who watch films differ basically in terms of age, gender, and economic considerations (Vivian 2002, 149). It may also vary in behaviour, perception and cultural considerations. With this belief, I will stand in conviction that both films – Central Station and City of God are presented using the idea of semiotics. Thus, both illustrate Brazilian popular culture depending on the sensibilities of the viewers.
Interestingly, Central Station and City of God are comparatively good films for they brought gratification to viewers, artistic in their own sense, mentally and socially challenging, commercially viable, and engaging to the known standards of film production. The viewers differ in taste and perception of what is a good or bad film. What is a good film? A clear purpose, good script, unity of elements and technical presentation, commercial viability, and entertainment value constitutes a good film. The presence of a purpose in creating a certain film is the most basic consideration that a filmmaker must bear in mind. What is his/her intent – to inform, entertain, earn, etc.? With the identification of the specific intention, the filmmaker will have a clearer visualisation of the next steps to complete the entire process. A well-written, researched, and prepared script equates to a good story and theme. The universality of the theme may serve as a unifying agent in a wide array of viewers. To have a satisfactory crafted film, there is the presence of unity in terms of its elements and technical superficialities or presentation. Since filmmaking is not just an art but also a form of business, it must be commercially viable and profitable. Lastly, whatever the intent is, the entertainment value of the film must be highly sustainable. As an example, the classic Steven Spielberg’s E.T. (Extra Terrestrial) released in 1982 is considered a good film due to the fact that it convened the standards identified above.
It is imperative to specify that there are three types of audience that may tend to analyse and involve their selves in the process of criticising the work. They are the potential audience – the people that are not yet penetrated by media; the paying audience – people who use media forms daily; and the audience reached – people who are reached by media voluntarily (McQuail 1994, 299). Viewers may also be described as someone “who crave variety, surprise, suspense, and mental challenges (Phillips 1999, 411). Most of the time, these viewers possess a “high level of education that tend to be more vulnerable to some types of media message that includes logical appeals” (Rodman 2001, 381). Moreover, people in different habitat of meanings perceive a variety of implication in the same creative work and their perceptions of meaning tend to change as the time passes by – may it be in terms of symptomatic meanings or ideology (explicit or implicit) (Phillips 1999, 452-53). These meanings are to some extent relative, but a film sets parameters to interpretations of such, and some of these interpretations are vulnerable by members of the audience.
Generally, film is a medium of a “broader global patterns and frameworks, especially the communication industry as an integrated interacting whole” (Mowlana 1997, 97). It provides a giant mirror that serves as a reflection of the values, the half-truths, and the ideals of the society and its people (Whetmore 1997, 201). Universal emotions such as fear, love, disappointment, etc. have been experienced by people. It could be a total ruin, complete love, paralyzing fear, or savage violence. Through film, it blows up these emotions until they become “larger than life” (Whetmore 1997, 201). Because of film’s popularity and universality, many people use films as an agent of communication, education, learning, and entertainment. The feeling of audience and resemblance of existence is the basic element of cinema without which there is no art of filmmaking. The complex, artistic whole and elements are facilitated by a number of linkages with the artistic cultural experiences of the society (Lotman 1994, 1). Film is an externalization of what is real in life. As stated, people relate and learn from it. It is a medium of entertainment, communication, and instruction. Viewers resort to movies as means of diversion and amusement.
Meanwhile, film analysis and criticism plays one principal purpose – to evaluate the overall quality of a particular film. In today’s contemporary standards, it could be theorised that the presence of award-giving institutions are helpful to viewers and film related people especially in determining the aspects that needs further development and the parts that need to be maintained. Award-giving bodies qualify or can also intensify the views of more legitimate and credible film critics. Like all mass media, film has two component parts that serve as basis in film analysis – the form and the content (Whetmore 1997, 207). These alone may determine how directors may portray the idea they want to incorporate in their films (like popular culture).
All in all, the concept of film and its audience is very essential to every individual that consider film as a portrayal of reality. However, today’s film industry is facing several great challenges that are headed for radical transformation (David 1998, 119). Like the film itself, the industry and its people will undergo further dimensions in terms of technological approaches and developments.
Bibliography
Benedetti, R. 2001, Action! Acting for Film and TV, Allyn and Bacon, New York.
Biagi, S. 1990, Media Impact, updated first edition, Wadsworth, New York.
Bryant, J. & Thompson, S. 2002, Fundamentals of Media Effects, McGraw Hill, Boston.
Cavell, S. 1981, Pursuits of Happiness: The Hollywood Comedy of Remarriage, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass.
David, J. 1998, Wages of Cinema: Film in Philippines Perspective, University of the Philippines Press, Manila, Philippines.
David, N. 1990, the National Pastime: Contemporary Philippine Cinema, Advil, Manila, PH.
Edwards, R & Usher, R 2000, Globalisation and Pedagogy: Space, Place, and
Identity, Routledge, London.
Hart, A. 1991, Understanding Media: a Practical Guide, Routledge, London.
Hirst, P & Thompson, G 1996, Globalisation in Question: the international
economy and the possibilities of governance, Oxford, Polity.
Lotman, J. 1994, Movie Time, Navotas Press, Navotas, Philippines.
McQual, D. 1994, Mass Comm Theory – an Introduction, Routledge, London.
Mowlana, H. 1997, Global Information and World Communication, 2nd edition,
Sage, London.
Phillips, W. 1999, Film: an Introduction, Bedford/St. Martin, Boston, Mass.
Rodman, G. 2001, Making Sense of media: an Introduction to Mass Communication, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, Mass.
Whetmore, E.J. 1997, Mediamerica: Form, Content, and Consequence of Mass Communication, Wadsworth, New York.
Vivian, J. 2002, The Media of mass Communication, 6th edition, Pearson
Education Company, New York.
D. Central Station, City of God and Popular Culture in Brazil
Walter Salles’s Central Station (1998) portrays the globalised city of Rio de Janeiro from a working class or unemployed perspective in contrast to a far more humane landscape in the rural northeast. Fernando Meirelles and Katia Lund offer a sociological study of the development of the favela (shanty town) in a neighbourhood of Rio, called Cidade de Deus, City of God (2002) from what appears to be an insider’s point of view. How do the directors portray popular culture under globalisation in each of these films and within this portrayal, is there any remaining memory of Cinema Novo?
No comments:
Post a Comment