What's Cool About Medium Cool

There is a lot more meaning behind medium Cool than just what the spectator watches. If one looks close into it's intertextual meaning, it is not just about the 60's, but about people's search for something better. No better way to present this idea in the film then by mixing fictional storyline with documentary footage of things happening during that time. It also makes it complicated for the spectator to distinguish between the fact and fiction. One of the most important things that was done to make this mixture of fact and fiction work was making the main character a news reporter. Through the 60's with all the controversial things happening, like the Vietnam war and Civil Rights movement, one of the more controversial issues was the news reporters and what they were reporting on. Making the main character a news reporter was a way to relate the documentary footage with the fiction so there is a common bond between the two and most importantly, make it even more complicated for the spectator to distinguish between the two. Another element that the film does a great job with is the dialogue that is said between the characters. Like in the field with the father and son; they have a conversation about never letting a women take charge. Though the scene had nothing to do with the plot, it fits right in with the theme of the movie because that was another major issue at the time; women's rights. The poster of Bobby Kennedy, Martin Luther King's speech, the segregation of black people; all these elements are added to make this mixture of fact and fiction work together through this hybrid film. Though the film is not considered a documentary, it comes closer to documenting reality than do a majority of documentaries. Even though the film was not a big hit at the box office, probably because most viewers are afraid of something new, it does an excellent job a presenting something new and inventive.

The Jackal of Nahueltoro - The Government's Position

I found myself enjoying this filme, though it seemed a bit too long for it's own good, and quite bland in a number of areas. However, the class's discussion afterwards had me thinking about the message connected toThe Jackal of Nahueltoro. The death penalty has always been a widely disputed subject - was the government trying to make an example out of Jose (Jorge)? We as an audience are told of this destitute and povertized childhood, which is assumed to be directly linked with his alcoholism and his following through with the murders of the family. When taken to prison for what is almost certainly deserving of the death penalty, the government educates him. Why bother educating him? I thought it really interesting to see how much more forgiving people were once "Jorge" had found God and religion, especially the prison official around him. Maybe the public/prison did rest easier knowing they helped him see the profound error of his ways. Apart from the religion aspect, I couldn't help thinking that the government was educating him to make the public aware that he had been morally "cleansed" and make it less obvious that in reality, the government had contributed signifcantly to his harsh childhood. Was the jackal really the changed person the prison wanted him portrayed as? Or just brainwashed to the point that the jackal, as well as his public and the prison officials, felt "at peace" with the fact he was being put to death?

Wide Open City

Even thought the class did not have to watch Rome: Open City, I did get a chance to see it myself. The film places some very interesting characters into an important event that affected the world, World War II. The characters were so interesting because they has their own stories, but were placed in an important time. I could not help but think of Medium Cool and the way that film incorporated characters into true events. However, Open City succeeded where Medium Cool failed. Open City gave us characters who had a real reason for being in the film. Some were fighting the Nazis for the better of the country, while others were trying to silence the liberators in order for the Nazis to have full control. The viewer really felt for the characters in the film, especially the priest. Don Pietro was such an interesting characters because this priest was torn between his duty to God and his duty to his fellow man. He did what he could in order to help those who fought for people's freedom. Don Pietro even gives up his life at the end of the film instead of giving up secrets to the enemy. The audience can really feel a connection with the priest because he is giving up his own life for the freedom of others. The film provides us with an intimate look at those brave figures who attempted to fight oppression and bring freedom to their people.

Self-reflection in Waiting for Guffman

In some ways , Waiting For Guffman was about forgotten dreams. Reminiscent of My Life With Morissey, and even Requiem For A Dream, since they all deal with characters longing for greatness, and cruelly force the spectator to feel the pain of his gaze. Corky is absurd. the director lets us know he was involved in some shows that were so off Broadway, they may have been stationed in Jersey City, and the other main characters were the town council board, the cat members, and the music director. Each has the fantasy they hide in, and secretly pursue. By exposing their deepest, most embarassing thoughts/behaviors, Guest implores us to question how ridiculous our fantasy seeking and hiding is, along how quick we are to laugh. Beyond the comedy, each character deals with loneliness, societal abandonment, and hopelessness. Even the town itself is forgotten. The council only put money into it to gain prestige for Blaine. The cast members hid themselves in the fantasy that they were good enough---that they were special. Isn't that a behavior that individuals engage in regulary, hoping that everyone is so focused on themselves, that they won't notice the comical absurdity?

Medium Cool--some thoughts

I preferred the medium used by the director for this film, as it skipped over the pitfalls of the documentary. It acknowledges the director's hand in shaping the perspective of the truth by blatantly proposing arguments of fact and causality through placing fictional characters within historically accurate settings.
The director also made good use his media-savvy audience, trained by watching television, films, and even short clips from the news and commercials to pick up cinematic shorthand. Wexler also referenced all of these media entities the audience previously viewed. He used the mass media's discourse on gender, race, and class to his advantage---poking hole sin the argument we assumed to be fact.
I saw this film as an amazing proposition of fact, and was more attracted to the creator's rhetorical prowess than visual display.

Medium Cool is, at best, Moderately Cool

Medium Cool was somewhat interesting because of the way these characters were placed in an important time period, but the story seems to suffer because the filmmakers had to somehow place these characters within these events. The characters have interesting stories, but they are not ineteresting enough to keep an entire film going. A film told with true events behind it has the potential to be extremely interesting, but Medium Cool does not allow us to come close enough to the characters to care what happens to them in the story. The film itself does make interesting comments on society and the Civil Rights movement, but the characters themselves only seem to be mediocre tools to make us see what is going on in the counrty. It was hard to feel any true compassion for the characters of the film because so little of their character was given to us. Robert Forestar's character seemed very distant, but almost to the extent where the audience would not want to know what happened to him. The filmmaker was obviously trying to make a political statement in the film, but he shoudl have been focusing on the characters just as much as the statement he was trying to make. The death of the characters came out of nowhere at the end but, even though the filmmaker wanted the viewer to see that everyone is watching this, it would have been more interesting to show some cause in the car accident. The characters do develop throughout the film, especially Robert Forstar's character, but not to the point where the viewer really has any true remorse for the character.

No Lies-All Lies

No Lies presented itself as an actual interview of a girl that tells all about an incident of being raped. The actress is very convincing with her portrayl of being a rape victim and the cameraman accomplishes his part of playing the curious director. It is not hard to imagine that John Cassavettes films had a major influence on this particular piece. It is very difficult to distinguish the difference between fact and fiction while watching, but by the end of the piece, it looked, sounded, and felt real, but was in fact coherced and a filmmaker from NYU was able to deceive the spectator by manipulating a documentary form in order to present a situation from a realist perspective. However, look at how she is able to do it. The film opens to two friends that are trying to think of something to film for the project. The scene presents itself as just a simple conversation between the friends and the cameraman even goes as far as to announce that "it's Cinema Verite". The spectator is now led to beleive that this is real. After some heckling by the camerman, the actress finally starts to slowly let on that she was recently raped. It is a situation that the spectator is not going to deny happened, maybe because of its degree of seriousness. Then, the camerman begins to basically harass the actress on why she did so little to let it be known. It is a fact that a majority of rape victims try to keep the incident quiet. Another element conviently included for the sake of authenticity. So now the piece looks as though it was just something shot between two friends and what they are talking about is just a coincedence. But the most convincing element is the title, No Lies. It is must have been great passing this piece off as something that really happened, all the while, exploiting a serious and disturbing issue that most anyone would not deny happened.

Medium Drool

The films we've watched in class up to this point have all contained some sort of story line that was entertaining. Medium Cool depends too much on the use of the actual riot and footage of the day. Because of this the story gets lost and it becomes a bad story with really great footage. If the film was just going to be a series of shots from the actual time period the filmmakers could make it more interesting by turning it into an actual documentary. The story ends up working against the power of the actual footage and turns the film into a boring, poorly written drama.

The Truth About No Lies

I enjoyed Mitchell Block's article about his film No Lies. There is a very interesting part where he talks about three separate relationships within the film. There is the filmmaker/subject relationship, the filmmaker/audience relationship and the film/audience relationship. No lies does well to abuse all of these. The filmmaker is harassing the subject during the film making. By doing so, the filmmaker then becomes unlikeable to the audience. (Even I started out liking the cameraman, but then turned on him towards the end.) Finally, the film presents itself as truth, although it is not, therefore deceiving the audience.
Although Block's film does well to abuse all three of these relationships, he takes pride in his ethical treatment of his work. He credits the film as fiction, even though it appears to be real. However, Block goes to great lengths to condemn documentary filmmakers such as Michael who parade their work as reality, yet misrepresent their subjects and the truth. I also liked his distinction between No Lies (which is drama that is fictional) and reality shows (which are drama that is real.) The difference is scripting before shooting and scripting after shooting.

Why Punishment Park Works

When you first start watching Punishment Park, you may get drawn into it's world, thinking it is real. Of course there are little clues along the way that help you realize that the movie is not real, but the actors in the film do a great job portraying the characters they are representing. It's not the events that make the movie feel real, it's the attitudes. The very outspoken revolutionary types in the group remind us of people we've come in contact with like that. The more passive characters who still found themselves at the park helped balance out the crowd. The panel members with their staunch, convoluted, conservative views could be any government panel or committee. Their readiness to gag and drag each interviewee out of the room reminds us of not only our own government's unwillingness to listen, but also the tendency of human nature to silence anyone we view as a threat to our viewpoint.
Even though I knew I was watching fiction, Punishment Park gave me the impression that something like this could actually happen. It is in that effect that the film had the most impact on me. Although the material in the film is somewhat time sensitive, the film has a timeless quality in reminding us to keep the powers that be in check.

What Can I Say About Medium Cool?

Medium Cool is a form of media, made by the media about how people in the media view the media. I think it would be hard to add any more layers of self reflexivity without becoming rediculous. It comments on how news is nothing more than entertainment, while combining both actual footage of news along with entertainment. What I liked about medium cool was that you never got the impression that the filmmakers wanted us to hate the media- only to be weary of it. During the end of the movie, the audience is treated to very exciting scenes of protests and riots, and yet it turns out that some of the most poignant footage is real. I think it would have been difficult to conceive a movie like this and then execute it so well, but Haskell Wexler pulled it off nicely.
Although it was shot to look like a documentary, there were never any points where I though the events portrayed were real. However, finding out that many of the clips were taken from actual events really helped to drive the point home. I really enjoyed the end when we catch a cameraman on a scaffold and he points the camera at us. Scary!

Wexler's questions

Medium Cool was a fascinating look on mass media. Haskell Wexler constructed a layered movie. The viewer hasn't a clue as to what is real and what is not. I was unaware of how the movie was shot. When I found that the riots and the convention were not recreated events, it made me step back and look at the movie in a critical way. These scenes had the feel of a news story, the fast paced and action packed shots with close ups; which made me think, is this a comment on the truth that one sees in the news? For instance, the actress who plays the mother is thrown into a violent riot and is asked wander around with real protestors but to remain in character. Without knowing this, the viewer does not know what is going on and takes the scene as complete truth to the story. The same as when one watches the news, you trust the pictures are real and within the context of the story. But one does not know the whole truth unless you investigate. Another question arose from Wexler's weave of truth and fiction is what did the protesters think of this woman in yellow? You have to wonder if she interacted with the reality going around her and if her fictional character's presence was affected someone's step in reality. Wexler's skill in Medium Cool goes beyond a developed story, it's the comment on never ending questioning of the media and what one's role should be in forming and watching.

MEDIUM COOL

This was the second time I watched this movie. The first time I didnt pay attention to the documentary fashion of the movie, nor do I think you need to. Watching it again, I see how the director did integrate documentary like film making by observing his characters at times from a distance as they walked around in a natural, unstable environment. I believe this was more for budget reasons though. I dont think this director was going for a documntary look but he used his creativity to get past funding problems.

Reflecting on No Lies

I enjoyed the discussion that everyone got into after the viewing of "No Lies." The film brings up a good topic of rape and how it is dealt with in society. The filmmaker character is very pushy about the subject, and almost seems to be badgering his girlfriend as if it were her fault. Then he takes a sudden vigilante turn and begins to question her for not doing more about the rape. This aspect is what I found most interesting about the movie. The girl would rather put it behind her and not think about it, whereas the guy thinks she should dredge everything back up.
A rape will have serious psychological effect on the victim, but does that mean they should never be allowed to move on? If the woman turns a blind eye, does that make it easier for the next rapist to get away with it. More importantly, just because you are raped, does that obligate you to pick up a torch and become an anti-rape crusader? Just because someone wants to put the past behind them doesn't mean they don't care. The girl was merely willing to move on instead of trying to solve a crime that probably would have not gotten solved anyway. By forcing someone to reopen a dark part of their life when there is little hope it will do any good, who does that benefit?

comment upon comment

In a pseudodocumentary, unlike the mockumentary, the form takes second seat to focusing on the content. Pseudodocumentary’s content is so seriously discussed and directed, that the applied fictional events become real. It is interesting that Death of a President is following the format of a TV news show in order to comment on the reliability of today’s news. At the same time the film tricks the viewer into believing the fiction is truth by use of the documentary and the news form. Despite the entertainment value, the film Death of a President seems to be a comment on the question “what is reality”?

Jump Cutting Punishment Park

One of the most interesting aspects of Punishment Park was the use of jump cutting between the people who were being sentenced and the people who were already in the park. This seemed to add to the realism of the piece because we are seeing how people arrive in the park and how people react when they are actually in the park.

The people on trial sit in the chair and try to state their points of view, even though the committee never really listens to their ideas. They are trying to do what is right but have no idea of what is in store for them. As they are being sentenced, they stand in a line, all of whom choosing punishment park over jail. If they only knew what was in store for them, they would have chosen jail in a second.

The parallel we are given of the people in the park is showing us that, even if you do make it to the flag, you will not finish the course. The people who make it did everything right to arrive at their destination, but their attempt was in vain.

The realism of the story becomes even more evident, even though it was not true, because of the parallels we are given in the film. The people on trial all choose what they think is the easy route, not knowing what is in store for them. The people in the park are soon realizing that their decision to enter the park was a mistake and the only reason for the park to was exterminate them. They could not be victorious in the park because it would not be allowed to happen and we are led to believe that those on trial will soon have the same fate.

No Lies

This film was disturbing for the reason that it feels so realistic. Throughout the 16 minutes of the film there is only one break in the filming which helps in letting the acting unfold as the events happen. This is helpful because the audience sees the transformation from a happy young woman to a sobbing desperate girl after telling her story. The fact that the cameraman is continuous in getting his desired reaction is also disturbing and adds to the realism as the actions unfold. This is a believable slice of life because of the fact that rapes often go unsolved, for the reason that people don't believe the accuser.

Attention to Detail in Waiting for Guffman

One of the things that made Waiting for Guffman feel like a real documentary was the attention to detail. Every single aspect of the sets were thought out in relation to the background. Whether its the posters on Corkeys wall or the various knickknacks on his desk. The point is that all of the characters personas matched the worlds that they lived in. In the process of thinking this through Christopher Guest made the characters more believable for the audience. In "real life documentary" when a subject is interviewed the background surrounding them is usually a place that they are comfortable making it more believable. Although the film is ridiculous with its characters it is a believable documentary because of the story world that they live in and because of the characters feel that they are truly being documented for their talents rather than their flaws.