Knoepfler, (Belated) Casablanca

Casablanca was not originally intended to be anything inspirational or spectacular. The following the film gained was not built into the movie beforehand. I really like this quality and think it brings a whole new level to watching it. The film, however, is interpreted in many different ways and is really deeply analyzed by some to have far deeper meanings than originally intended. Umberto Eco explains that the film deals with the idea of sacrifice and it's connections to war. This idea of sacrifice is seen as romantic which expands the original intention of the film, which was to be a simple romance set in Casablanca fueled by the recent Allied invasion of North Africa. Howard Koch, one of the screenwriters of the film, considers the film a sort of political allegory, comparing Rick to president FDR. FDR and Rick both initially rejected the war (FDR waiting till Pearl Harbor and Rick initially claiming his neutrality in the conflict.) Overall, I really think the film was overanalyzed and held to be something far higher than it was originally intended. I'm all for artistic interpretations of film, but I feel that early films were too superficial to be analyzed at that deep of a level.

Johnson & Glickert: The Chase

Cardon, Sanders, Villavicencio, Labbe: Whip My Hair Around Loyola

Hutchinson-Thomas-Gelato!

Jaymye is inspired to get gelato!

Gnuse, Moises - Roomates

Michael and Adam show just how hard it is to share a room.

Music is Paranoia by The Death Set

Arruebarrena, Armato, "Kung Fu Staring Contest"

We decided to make a video about a staring contest. Then we decided we'd do it kung fu style.

We had some issues with the video file format. We recorded it on Matt's phone, and the extension was .mp4, and for some reason his computer thought it needed to be read by this freeware program that put a watermark on it, and it was really annoying. But we got it to work. We're pretty proud of this, we've been cracking up laughing throughout the whole process.

Isaacson, Westerfield: Everybody Loves Reagan

Short sketch on 80s economics. Check comments for creator commentary.

Hales, Becnel- "Time Enough at Last (An E-book Version)"

This short is a modern take on my favorite episode of the Twilight Zone, "Time Enough at Last." In the original, the main character (Burgess Meredith) wants to read constantly but is inhibited by everyone else in his daily life. He takes his lunch (reading) break in the safe at the bank he works at when he sees in the daily newspaper that there is a possibility of an H-bomb. He gets back to his reading and then hears the bomb. When he emerges from the safe, he finds that he is the last living man on earth. He is ecstatic about this discovery because now he can read all day and no one can bother him. Only, as he walks down the steps of the library with his arms full of books, his glasses fall and break. He is left with no human interaction and no way to read. 

We did our version with a Kindle. Tragedy ensues when the electricity goes out around the world... leaving no way to charge the "book."

Nolley, Iqbal, Cascioppo- A Walk in the Park

"A Walk in the Park"

This movie was our take on a thriller/suspense movie with a funny twist at the end. The majority of the film was shot in Audubon Park and Loyola's campus. Azreen does an amazing job is being a total creep in this one minute film. We also wanted to make fun of how Dominic was so freaked out by such a tiny person. In all, the project was enjoyable and we had a lot of fun. It was amazing to us how we were able to successfully shoot this movie in less than forty minutes and edit it in such a short span of time. Hopefully everyone will enjoy it (especially Professor McCay :]]).

Fisher & Barkley: One Minute Film

This film is a one minute montage of CC's coffee on Loyola campus. Filmed by Ms. Barkley and edited by Mr. Fisher. We very much enjoyed the creative process of choosing a topic for our film and actually filmed a few movies. However, it turned out that the most simple film fit. The editing process was fun and we will use iMovie much more in the future.

Cascioppo -Kanye West, the nobel superstar tradition, & the internet- Music Blog Makeup

I am writing this blog for the sole purpose of making up points that I did not receive because I was not in attendence for class on the day that the other classmates gave presentations about music/their ipods/itunes/pandora etc..

There is a man. A man who is at once extremely creative and also extremely dim-witted. A man who has been called a "jackass" by our nobel peace prize winning president Barrack Obama. One who stood next to Mike Myers and stated former President George W. Bush (godbless him)"doesn't care about black people". And a man who, in his most wacky move yet, stormed the stage of the MTV video music awards and stole the microphone away from a tearful 19 year old country/pop singer - furthermore telling her she did not deserve the award... This man, Chicago's own Kanye West, has recently used an unconventional version of the internet/music relationship in order to promote his most recent, second-best album, "My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy".

This fall Kanye West has been releasing one song available to download, free of charge, through his website each and every friday. These single downloads are leading up to the full-release of "My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy" on November 22, 2010.

By "giving" to his fans, Kanye is rebuilding an image of respect to offer to the mainstream audience(like the people who believe that W. actually does care about black people [see New Orleans, LA. August 2005]. These same people being the ones who watch/take stock in the MTV awards and say things like "you know I have to admit I really do like Taylor Swift...")whom he needs support from. (BTW I like Taylor Swift's hair)

It's hard to tell whether the friday releases, which he called the GOOD friday series, will have any noticeable effect on the profit margin for this latest album. But in our modern internet age profit margin on a single album is not the point. Kanye West is an image, a label, a self-titled renaissance man. His real profits come from this image, not from single album sales or itunes downloads. What is truly essential for Kanye is the self-perpetuation of this image. He has to stay on the public radar. His popularity with the masses is what keeps him and his people rich. The GOOD friday series was just another way of hyping himself (not to say that the latest album itself was overhyped because it's a great album). Like his past controversies, which could be argued are all 100% pre-meditated, the GOOD friday series was just meant to keep people talking, blogging, and googleing all things "Kanye West".

Kehoe, Coulter, Slan: Johnny & The Priest

This is our one minute film project. I had a ton of fun working with these fellows. We all put in the little time we had and made a funny joke come to life. If I could have done anything different I would have added voices to the ants he was killing and made some crazy sound effects with each splatted ant. I would have made the closing credit a lot more slower so people can get the joke. Over all both the Chris made this film hiliarious. They were gun-ho and we made it a success. I can't say I'm the best cinematographer but I think I did a great job shooting the film on my camera phone and editing it. Hope you enjoy class and Professor McCay. This film has been Rated R due to Violence and Language!

Cole & Himmelberg, One Minute (and a half) film

Knoepfler, Kozaites: Andrew Meets a Friend.

Andrew, while strolling through the beautiful Loyola New Orleans campus, stumbles upon a mysterious furry creature. The two develop an intimate relationship based on their shared joy of being awesome.

Villacreces, Falanga, Cooper, Malveaux: Distractions (One Minute Film)

Distractions students have in the library while studying for finals.

Penland, Mathey: Speeding

Griffin, Bienvenu "Run Margot Run"

See our added comments below to discover our successes/failures in making this short film and more!

Tucker, Goldberg: 1 minute film

Christian- Fenwick, Phillpott, On The Run

McCayOne Minute Film Prompt

You will work with your partner to make and edit a one-minute film. You must post that film before 4:00 P.M on Tuesday, November 23. Since classes do not end until then, you should have plenty of time to meet with your partner, work on the film and post it to the blog.
1. Remember to put the Last names of all participants on the film in the title, and the full names of all participants in the label.
2. Remember to get waivers from anybody in the film who is not in the class. The waiver should say " I (name of person) give permission for my part in the film to be posted on the Introduction to Film and Digital Media Blog. I understand that this is a public blog, and I do not hold Loyola or the makers of this film responsible for any responses to this blog." Date and have the person sign the waiver and give it to me on Monday, November 22. I will be in until noon.
3. Make sure your film is sized properly.
4. Make sure sound is working.
5. Comment on the film: you successes and failures, some comments on what you learned, etc.All participants should comment and give their name after their comment.

Seither Casablanca

Casablanca, the 1942 classic directed by Michael Curtiz, has endured the tests of time and has emerged as one of the most celebrated movies of all time. Casablanca is not only a phenomenally well-done film, but it also carries with it a poignant message, which was delivered when it came to the silver screen. In order to fully understand the impact that Casablanca had on society when it was released, one must understand the social context of the day. In late 1941, the United States entered World War II, which is also the setting of the film. There is an interesting parallel that exists between Rick’s actions (before he took any active role in the fight against the Nazis) and the actions of the United States (before entering the war). In the wake of World War I, the United States adopted policies of isolationism and non-intervention. In fact, the United States Congress passed the Neutrality Acts in the late-1930’s to try and prevent the United States from getting involved in the war that was raging in Europe. Rick has the same attitude as the United States regarding involvement in the war. Rick says, “I don’t stick my neck out for anybody” at several points in the movie. However, just like the United States, Rick eventually enters the fight against the Nazi’s. Casablanca’s message was an important one at the time because the movie was released just a few weeks after the Allied Invasion of North Africa.

In the final scene of Casablanca, Rick has a standoff with Major Strasser. During this scene, Major Strasser arrives and attempts to phone the radio tower to prevent the plane carrying Victor Laslo from taking off. The shot is very intense and an analysis of the mise en scene will help to reveal the techniques used to achieve this tense confrontation. The camera proxemics in the shots of Rick and Major Stasser, the shots that switch back and forth between the two characters, are personal. The overhead lighting in the scene creates shadows created by Rick’s hat on his eyes. These shadows veil his eyes and create a nice effect. As the shot rotates from Rick to Strasser, so does the dominant, but in the end, Rick is the dominant in the shot that is taken from over Strasser’s shoulder when he is shot.

Kehoe: Freedom and Minority Report

In Minority Report all murder has stopped because of the Pre Cog’s ability to predict a murder before it happens. A major underlying theme in the film is the idea of freedom. If someone can be arrested for a crime they have not yet committed then the idea of free choice is an illusion because no matter what a person’s current intentions are, if the Pre Cogs determine that that person will commit a murder in the future, they are labeled as a criminal by society.
Terri Murray’s “Our Post-Moral Future” tackles the same issues as Minority Report but in a real world setting. Murray’s article talks about how new brain scanning technologies are able to predict a person’s intentions. The implication of this new technology is that society will soon be able to predict if a person will be a criminal. It also implies that there is a genetic predisposition to criminal behavior in some people.
The technology in Minority Report is strikingly similar to the technology described in Murray’s article. However, the difference between Minority Report and reality is how the “criminals” are treated. In Minority Report the people who are arrested are treated as if they did commit a murder, they are labeled as a criminal and punished. Murray suggests that the technology described in her article will do the same thing; if someone has a genetic predisposition to crime then that person will be labeled as a criminal thereby taking choice away from that person. Here is where I disagree with Murray, if society were able to predict if a person was going to be a criminal, I feel that the society would treat them as a person with a disease or disorder. To suggest that that would be taking away a choice would be like saying that diagnosing someone with depression is taking away his or her choice to be happy. But of course it does not, it just means that the person with depression has to be counseled or medicated to live a happy life. It is the same with crime, if it can be scientifically determined that a person has a predisposition towards criminal behavior then they should be treated like anyone else who has a genetic or psychological problem.

Armato, Avatar

My personal avatar is a camera. This is not because I particularly enjoy photography; I mean I've taken a picture before, and I can appreciated a skillfully captured moment, but I'm all but ignorant to the greater world of photography.

I chose a camera because it is a tool through which people observe. And I consider my tendency to observe one of my most dominating character traits. When I meet new people, I need to observe them before I fully interact with them. So I sort of stand behind a camera and watch, picking up on what they think is funny, what their taste in entertainment is, how they feel about themselves. Only then do I become engaged in a conversation or interaction.

Worthy - Minority Report - How close was Dick's vision to reality?

In Minority Report, director Stephen Spielberg uses cinema to bring the visions of short story author Phillip K. Dick to life. First published in 1956, Dick’s intense and what are considered by many to be somewhat paranoid scenes – which in my personal opinion, were heavily influenced by the era they were written in (ie: Cold War, Russian enemies, American hysteria) – question whether or not human beings are predisposed to commit crimes or if they have the free will to change their outcomes.

Spielberg expands on Dick’s writings to create a world where human beings are predisposed to fearing their government. Their arrests are caused by actions that have been foreseen by government “forces” – most of the population remaining in the dark about the existence of Pre-Cogs – and, as such, create the ideology that the government knows all. I first saw this film at its original release (December 2002) and understood the basic concepts, but did not harbor the knowledge I do now to contrast the differences between the imaginary world of Phillip K. Dick and the world we live in. Today, I have to ask myself whether or not he was on to something.

To be honest, I think Spielberg created a world that is not too far off from reality – both his and Dick’s. In Lester D. Friedman’s article Minority Report: A Dystopic Vision, he explains the accidental yet perfect timing of the film’s release. While written before the September 11th terrorist attacks, Minority Report was released at a time where Americans constantly questioned the extent of their safety, security and their personal information. He also explores the importance of maintaining essential human freedoms so they are not exchanged for so-called “governmental assurances.”

In his article Friedman says, “…Can we trust the FBI and the CIA to exercise appropriate restraints, to monitor only those who endanger our safety and not those who hold unpopular opinions, if given greater power to patrol our lives? Will President Bush's and Tom Ridge's Department of Homeland Security prevent violent activities or routinely engage in unjustified surveillance of our personal lives? Does the former justify the latter? It is also a time when, while ethicists debate the ramifications of the latest scientific findings about genetic predispositions, prisons throughout the United States contain people arrested because the government suspects they would have committed future crimes.”

In short, we currently live in a world where the slightest suspicions that would, under normal circumstances, would remain just so, contain enough “evidence” to lead to conviction and life-altering damages. We have also lived through a state of panic similar to the environment Americans were subdued to during the Cold War (unless you find S.W.A.T. teams searching mailboxes for anthrax any different than the duck-and-cover drills elementary schools students memorized, the idea being ensuring safety and knowing what you can do to deter oneself from danger) . The combination of Dick’s fears and Spielberg’s vision provides illusions to the fact that the media and the government are long time acquaintances. I find it ironic and chilling that the media follows a timeline where current events can coincide with our entertainment with such ease.

Cascioppo - Minority Report

Steven Spielberg's Minority Report revolves around the question of whether humans have a conscious control over their actions. Speilberg asks the audience whether such a thing as "free will" exists. Furthermore he asks whether an individuals concept of the "OTHER" is what motivates their actions. The idea of the "other" that I want to describe is the idea that human beings are forced to make decisions, consciously and subconsciously, according to how they feel they are going to be perceived by a separate entity.

In Minority Report the "other" is displayed in many different ways. One could argue that in the film the "other" is represented by the government and specifically the pre-crime detectives. In the film the government is at once distant and also always surrounding the citizens. Most importantly the presence of the government is always felt. The way the government is always around but is actually seen very little is an interesting idea. Interesting in that it is still able to hold so much power yet may actually consist of very few individuals. A good example of the kind of powerful effect the "other" can have can be seen in a specific kind of prison design.

The Panopticon, to briefly summarize it, is a prison layout designed by the english philosopher Jeremy Bentham. It consists of a circular, colliseum like layout of cells. All the cells face into the middle of the circle. In the middle of the circle stands a vertical tower. The tower has windows on all sides and at all levels, so the prisoner is theoretically never out of site. Furthermore the lights never go completely out in the Panopticon. The guards are never seen inside the tower, the windows cannot be seen in from the outside. Bentham's design, he argued, would need very few guards - or maybe (eventually?) none. It's design is successful because of the psychological power of the perceived other.

This is similar to Minority Report where the most frightening aspect of the pre-crime team is not their sheer maliciousness but in there ability to know everything you could possibly due.

Griffin- Adam Savage's "Blade Runner"

In Adam Savage’s article on “Blade Runner,” his favorite film, he dissects the film’s technology and mise en scene to show the timeless merit of the movie. He maintains that despite more advanced and sophisticated sci-fi films like “Matrix” and “Star Wars” that came after, “Blade Runner surpasses anything that’s been done since.” Movies in this genre rely heavily on special effects and CGI for their mass appeal, so how can “Blade Runner” still shine as a movie superior to its more technologically advanced descendants?

Ridley Scott was resourceful with the technology available to him, like model mastery and motion control, using it to create a world in which the viewer feels very much apart and grounded. These techniques might not seem appealing to filmmakers today but the older methods cannot be forgotten in favor of newer devices. All of the technology in “Blade Runner” serves the greater purpose of the story, and the narrative, the most central device in any movie. The very story itself cannot be obscured or neglected to special affects, which this film avoids.  “Blade Runner” is timeless and successful because the character arch of Rick Deckard is complete and the themes followed through. The technology that creates the dystopian megalopolis of the future allows the viewer to inhabit the setting intimately, but our focus remains on the profound conflict of what is human and who has the power to give and take away life. Sci-fi films of today would   do well to remember “Blade Runner” and mimic its ability to dazzle with CGI and the like while also being able to communicate a story that resonates in the real world. 

Armato, Morality and Minority Report

Minority Report offers several topics for moral debate in the realm of crime and justice. Primarily, of course, is the question of the legitimacy of a precog's prediction of a crime as compared to the predicted criminal's realized line of action.

These predictions alienate the supposed perpetrators as murderous monsters. The "justice" perpetrators receive actually removes their ability to provide legal defenses for themselves. What the precogs offer the police can be thought of as conditional surveillance—looking into their visions is similar to watching footage from a security camera, but it's a security camera in the future that might be at a different angle than you think, or that won't capture the whole story, or that is capturing something that ends up not occurring.

The precogs' predictions (accusations) are like a futuristic version of red-light and speed cameras that record when we break automobile laws. In both scenarios, the accused is found guilty only through surveillance, which is not sufficient enough evidence to convict someone of wrong-doing. There is an added level of injustice in the Minority Report scenario, though: the surveilled event may be a complete fabrication that is not the least bit actualized.

This brings me to Terri Murray's "Our Post-Moral Future?" which describes new technology capable of "reading" brains to determine if a person is likely to commit a crime. Hello, science fiction in the real world. She also brings up how our society likes to think of criminals as "ill" people who can be cured of an inherent inclination to commit crime. Absolute tomfoolery, if you ask me. Most people have felt hatred for another person before, and some of us have thought about how nice it would be to kill a person we hate; but hardly anybody decides to go the immoral route. Most of us take the time to think rationally and make the decision that we are not going to murder our high school disciplinarians, our exes, our in-laws, or our roommates.

Murderers have that option to, the option to not commit murder. Even if a man has his hand on a trigger and is ready to fire at his boss, he can still decide to not shoot. Hell, even if he does shoot and immediately comes to his senses, he can call for help or try to give first aid assistance. That would save his boss's life and get him stuck with a charge of simply attempted murder. The point is that he has options.

In Minority Report the supposed criminals have no options. The whole concept of freedom is neglected, and the society fully embraces a type of mechanistic world view, that everything that will happen directly results from everything that is happening, and the future cannot be changed. Free will then doesn't exist, and morality becomes an illusion.

Hales- Blade Runner

The “other” in Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner is the Nexus 6. These ‘replicants’ were built by the head of the Tyrell Corporation for several different reasons, but primarily to work on ‘off world’ planets and essentially be slaves. Each model has a different specialty: Roy has optimum self-sufficiency and incredible strength, Pris was noted as a basic pleasure model and had great acrobatic skills, and Zhora was termed the Beauty and the Beast. Because it was believed that after a certain amount of time that the replicants might acquire human emotions (and therefore pose a threat to their usefulness and willingness to comply to their said actions) the Nexus 6 were given a bult in 4 year life span.They came back to Earth to get the brains behind the Tyrell Corporation to lengthen their life spans. When Roy has Sebastian take him to meet Tyrell he is treated with a minimum amount of respect, almost child-like. I find it interesting that Roy simply took what Tyrell said for the end al be all so quickly, it seems like a normal person might continue trying to find a way to stay alive. Tyrell does seem to treat him like a child though and that could be seen as Tyrell looking down on him and disrespecting his emotions as invalid, or it could be seen as a father figure reaction because Tyrell was his maker.

            I cannot help but wonder what point the police force saw in having Deckard hunt and kill the replicants if they knew that their expiration dates were so close on the horizon. Roy died of “natural” causes while he and Deckard were fighting it out. I believe it is important to note that at the end of the film the viewer discovers that Deckard is a replicant as well. Because of this, I find it incredibly cruel that he was asked to kill other replicants, Or, was he built specifically for that very reason? Deckard’s internal journey throughout the course of the film makes the viewer quiestion what being human really is. In the final scene when we find that he is a replicant all the lines between human and non-human are blurred. The love that he and Rachael felt towards each other shows us how strong the replicant’s feelings can be. We had been following his emotions the whole time thinking that he was a human. In Senior’s article, Blade Runner and Cyberpunk Visions of Humanity, he notes, “… all the boundaries are blurred between master and slave, hunter and the hunted, hero and villain, the animate and the inanimate, the human and the nonhuman…” This ambiguity becomes a major problem for the maker, who would have wanted a very clear line between replicant and human. But in the end, if you allow something the ability to have emotions, it becomes human as well. 

Shelby Gevry- Minority Report

As human beings we have ingrained in use the unfortunate necessity to put ourselves into groups. From socioeconomic classes to racial separations to grouping based on interests, sex, beliefs, nationality the list is infinite- we tend to place upon ourselves, whether willingly or not, certain distinctions as to separate ourselves from others, but why? Why is it that man is so driven to have an "us" and a "them"? Why is it that human nature drives us to make these distinctions, as if compelled to do so in the belief that somehow this separation must be made and in doing so we are somehow making ourselves better. As Antonio Sanchez-Escalonilla points out we place people into groups as a sort of defense mechanism. By labeling we make them less threatening because we know what they are, what to call them; to "root out those individuals who are a danger to our way of life," (pg 12). The idea being that with these distinctions we have the ability to label ourselves better than those outside of certain groups. This idea of the others or the outsiders is prevalent in the film Minority Report.
It is interesting to note just how quickly one can become another. In then out, with no warning or explanation. For Tom Cruise it was a simple thought, an innermost private thought that purged him from the "us" and sent him to the "them." Within Minority Report there are strict constraints placed society, certain groups that are adhered to. There are the cops, the precogs, the criminals, and the innocent everyday citizens- to name a few. But even within the police force there are separations. For example John Anderton, the main character played by Cruise, is acting chief of the Precrime unit a force the using precognitive people who can look into the future to see crimes before they are committed. The Precogs, they are referred as, create the most distinctive group, they are the farthest from "us." They are shunned from the outside world, trapped in a room treated as if they aren't even people. It is not only their abilities that distinguish them from others but the way in which they are used, tools not people. It is easier for humans to distance themselves, to make distinctions rather than to open there eyes and see that we are all others, that there is a "them" and an "us" only because we have made it so.

Cardon - Casablanca

The producers of major motion pictures work diligently to make sure that their film doesn’t alienate certain groups of people, because it could greatly effect the turn out in audience size. Finding common ground for everyone in the audience to agree on is important in regards to the overall success of the film. In the early stages of the film, Isla and Laszlo enter Rick’s café. Laszlo is unaware of the relationship his wife, Isla, and Rick had during the time of his absence. In the scene pictured, four of the main characters are present: Rick, Isla, Laszlo, and Captain Renault. A viewer could take this particular scene and use it’s elements as foreshadowing of what is to come. Isla is sitting down at the table looking at Rick with a certain smirk on her face. Captain Renault clearly realizes that there is something between the two, without having any prior knowledge to their previous relationship. Laszlo is placed further back to the right. He has a look of concern on his face as he looks at Rick. Both Rick and Isla are staring at one another as if no one else were around. The lighting is very low key with dramatic shadows. This use of light not only sets the mood of the nightclub, but it also adds to the mystery of the situation at hand. The frame is most definitely social. All four characters are in the frame, which captures their meeting.

Villavicencio-Casablanca

Set in December 1941 in Casablanca of French-ruled Morocco, the film Casablanca depicts the romantic struggle between an ex-freedom fighting nightclub owner, Rick, and his rediscovered true love, IIsa, who had previously deserted him when the Nazis invaded Paris and later went on to marry someone else. The film also has an underlying reference to American involvement in World War II.

The character of Rick Blaine is complex in that although pessimistic and apathetic—refusing drinks from night club customers, disrespecting his lover Yvonne, and having no interest in politics—he also still reveals a glimmer of the old Rick, a man who was happily in love with IIsa in Paris before she broke his heart. As the film comes to an end, Rick surrenders his reignited love for IIsa, allowing her to escape out of Casablanca with her husband, Louis.

Ricks character can be interpreted as representing the difficulties that arise when one attempts to be neutral, whether it involves a forbidden love or a World War. This relates to the Political Expediency Theory, in which director Michael Curtiz attempts to remain neutral regarding World War II. He used an excess of actors from many different races and a protagonist set on impartiality and detachment (yet who is at times also generous and passionate). In the end however, the main character chooses a side unable retain a complete disregard from the world around him.

The political expediency theory deals with presenting a certain political opinion (or lack there of in this case) in order to please others, rather than staying true to one’s own beliefs and morals.Because this film was released in 1942, the theme of between impossible neutrality parallels to Americas struggle to remain uninvolved in the war.

One important scene where Rick’s neutrality finally falters is when IIsa admits she is still in love with him and they kiss.

Mise en Scene:

Dominant: IIsa would be the dominant in this scene because not only does she take up the majority of the frame, but she also has more lighting casted on her face. She is facing the camera slightly more than Rick is as well.

Subsidiary: Rick would obviously be the next thing a viewer’s eye moves to even thought the background is lighter.  

Lighting: The characters in the scene seem to be somewhat casted in a shadow. The background is more lit than the characters but still dim overall. This would probably be considering low lighting. 

Camera Proxemics: this is an extreme Close-up because only their faces are within the frame. 

Frame: This frame would tight, closing in on their faces with the background out of focus and mostly unidentifiable. 

Angle: The camera seems to be at the same level of their faces so would be considered a straight on shot or eye level. 

Character proxemics: The characters are in an intimate proxemics of each other. 


Casablanca--Internet Movie Database

Cole, Casablanca

In Casablanca, the ideology of the movie proves to be deeper than just a typical love story, as many would argue. Set during World War II, the political ideology could only do so much to hide under the overwhelming love story. Before we know about Ilsa, we are introduced to Rick and Renault. These opposing characters dress in contrasting colors, noting their opposing ‘sides’ in the war. Clothed in white at first, and later darker colors, we are led to believe that Rick’s stance in the war is undecided. His nonchalant demeanor and selfish attitude give the appearance of self-imposed power, which we can trace in his relationship with Renault. Rick, being originally from New York, represents what American audiences of that time, 1942, wanted to see. In the end, Rick and Renault trump the German forces invading Casablanca, and allow their friends to escape to America. These dramatic changes from each character appeal to the target audience because of their nationalistic behaviors, especially during that uncertain time in history. The picture above, in Rick’s bar, depicts Rick as a source of power, which will prove to be true at the end of the movie. The four characters are all wearing light colors, reinforcing the idea that they are the ‘good’ in this ideology of good vs. evil. In this scene we see Renault in white as well, as opposed to his usual dark attire, foreshadowing his ultimate rebellion toward the German forces. The proximity of the characters to one another also gives the audience the idea that neither Rick nor Renault know which side they are on. The introduction of Ilsa further confuses Rick as to how involved he would like to be in the chaos of the war, as we can see from the picture, he only has eyes for her. Overall, the picture exudes confusion for all parties, however the lighting suggests that in the end, each party’s confusion will be settled.

Tucker, Minority Report

In the movie Minority Report the story takes place in a world where the whole justice system literally depends on two precogs. These precogs are humans whose thought can be taken from their heads and put on a screen to be analyzed. Their thoughts are analyzed because their thoughts show the future, future crimes. Precogs show crimes before they are committed so that the head of the police force Tom Anderton, who is played by Tom Cruise, can catch them before the crime is committed. Although this eliminates crime all together and supposedly saves many lives Terri Murray, the author of Our Post Moral Future, and I disagree with this idea. I believe that unless the crime is committed it cannot count as a crime or as Terri puts it " ‘crime’ is meaningless unless it is done, and is a crime precisely because it is done". Punishing someone for just their intent is taking away the freedom of choice and decision. I believe if this new type of justice system were to ever actually become a reality that the public would riot against it taking away their constitutional rights. Also if there were no crimes committed, no one as examples to show what would really happen if a horrible crime was committed then their would be no virtuous people because "what allows us to feel virtuous, as opposed to the vicious people who commit crimes, is that we choose not to act upon these thoughts". Terri also makes a good point by saying, "if we are prepared to punish people for what they merely intend to do, are we also prepared to reward people for good intentions before a virtuous deed is done?". In conclusion I think the whole idea of arresting people for a crime that has not been officially committed is violating rights and wrong.

Goldberg Blade Runner

Blade Runner is centralized to the conceptual conception of free will. Directed Ridley Scott, based off of Philip K Dick, who claims, “I am not a director, I am a philosopher. He poses two questions: A) What is reality, and B) what makes someone Human? Both extremely obscure philosophical questions, yet very futuristic as well asvery important. Is humanity a social conduction? Who does the power of dub another human being more or less human belong to? They may sound like crazy questions, but if you look back throughout history, as well as today, you will find they are not fanatical at all. What did we do to the slaves? Were they not considered 3/4^ths human? Or the Indians? Where did all of their land go; what about the Texas Mexican Boarder War of northern aggression – although it is another great example – I was not referring to the civil wars northern aggression either. The Japanese during WWII were they or were they not put into concentration camps, and were their lands not taken? What about the Holocaust? As for today what about the way immigrants are treated?

We don’t know what is “human.” We keep trying to find an answer. People come and people go, who claim to know. Who deem social groups lesser or greater? What is the driving force? Could it be fear? Is the only thing to fear, fear itself?Or is it each other? Dick portrays this idea of what is human In the film, Blade Runner, the protagonist’s name is Rick whose job is to seek out “replicants.” What are replicants? Replicants are humans whohave been created by man. They are programmed to be exactly what their maker wanted them to be. They are perfect hum beings for their intent. They all have memories. Granted they are not their memories, they are other peoples, but did those people not formulate themselves around such memories? Replicants have emotional and physical feeling; they are capable of love. To no surprise I am sure, you can guess they are not treated as humans. They are given a “shelf life” of 4 years, and then they “expire.” The antagonist’s in the film are the “replicants” who are not really antagonists at all they are morethe innocent bystanders of an experiment to which in terms of exponential growth was not fully understood. They just want to find their creator, and be freed, given their “civil rights.” The creators did not fully conceive what they were creating. “Some of the worst things to have ever happened werestarted with the best intentions. “

The film goes on presentingthis futuristically plausible question – what is human -- which is very futuristic, but at the rate at which we are creating technology “replicants” -- or something like them –- will not be so futuristic for as long as some of us may think. Robots are being made all around the world, and Asian is soon to be the “mother” of A.I.. We have not even determined our global rights; we are just beginningto globalize. Yet, we are creating something that will have the ability not only to succeed us all and be our sole demise; but far more confusion another group to deal with, another “other.” If we cannot even determine what it is that makes us human, then howcan we even begin to conceive a world with robots, where we tell them what they are?

K Dick presents the idea of eyes. The thought that eyes are the windows to the soul. So the only way to determine who is or is not a replicant is to perform a test. The test is a compilation of a series of quesitons that are meant to trigger certain emotional activity similar to a polygraph test except a camera is fixated on ones cornea as apposed to pulse. “Real people” can answer all the questions and their pupils will dilate accordingly. Replicants pupils will not. This is a very cleaver idea he presents. Most of the “replicants” are branded not human because they don’t have the emotional ties to things that we do. Yet the film then introduces replicants who can pass these tests because they were produced with the ability to do so. They were upgraded.

This film does a great job of combining, and presenting futuristic concepts and present issues. It, like its ideas are way beyond its time. We are our own worst enemy. We keep producing, and advancing. Yet what are we advancing towards? Is it a world where we will have to have tests to determine if we are human? Are we going to have nature? Are we going to even be here? Does history always repeat itself except to a more advanced level? And if so what is the level that ends it all?

Coulter, Minority Report

As the blind man says as he is dealing drugs to a cop, "In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king." Justice is always shows as wearing a blindfold and holding her scales in one hand and her sword in the other, this represents the three ideas behind social justice; balance, indiscrimination, and retribution. In the film "Minority Report" the idea of blind justice has gone a step further than in the past. In this future world the exists the law enforcement agency of "Pre-crime," where three psychics who can see a murder before it takes place. These people are used to prevent murders from taking place, however this is where their abilities end, only murder tears up the human psyche enough to register in these cognitions. This creates a nearly murder free society of citizens who are terrified of killing someone else, but can negate all other social constructed criminal acts without fear of reparation. As Terri Murray said in the article, "Promoting the deterministic model re-locates social evils in the individual or within human nature itself, while distracting attention from social and institutional inequities." With this system in place the man having sex with another persons wife seen at the beginning of the film feels safe enough in this action to hang around in the park outside of the families home and watch the husband leave, the cop feels safe enough to buy drugs from a dealer in the street, and illegal doctors can preform surgeries to give out new eyes free from punishment. In this type of society justice has turned her eye from everything but the most heinous of crimes while society as a whole suffers without her attention. Justice is out of balance and can not deliver retribution fairly when those who have yet to commit a crime are still sent to jail. The social system of this future world goes without judgment because justice can see only one thing in this land. She represents the one eyed man, who's one eye sees only murders and murderers and nothing else.

Fisher: Blade Runner

In this film we have a setting that takes place in the future after a nuclear apocalypse in a derelict Los Angeles in 2019.  The world now has a hierarchy within this dystopia, and as we see in the scene between Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) and his former supervisor Bryant (M. Emmet Walsh) when Deckard originally refuses the job to "retire" rogue androids but is forced to accept because if your not a cop, your a little person.  This reflects on the levels of hierarchy left in the world.  It is still based upon economics and status still but it has an extremely large gap between the rich (Tyrell Corporation), the cops, and those who speak "gutterspeak", the commoners. Below all of this we finally have the androids, made by the Tyrell Corporation.  These beings are considered the low of the low, not even human, even though they are techinically more than human or the epitome of human perfection.  In fact, they do not execute rogue androids, but rather have them retired in a somewhat violent fashion as we see in one of the better scene's from the film when Deckard chases down and retires Zhora (Joanna Cassidy), one of the androids illegally on earth.

So if all of this trouble is being cause by these androids, why do they make them? Why do they constantly improve them to be even more human?  Why are the laws not changed to accommodate these anomalies?  Why do we see that these androids have emotion and want to live?  It is possible to determine if someone is an android by using the Voight-Kampff test, which measures bodily functions such as breathing, blushing, heart rate and iris and pupil dilation in response to emotionally provocative questions which should not trigger a response in a android.  Which could lead us down another route in trying to determine what is human.  In Blade Runner apparently a human is determined by its emotional responses according to the V-K test.  However, we see Rachael (Sean Young) cry after we receive the knowledge that she is an android.  Also, do our memories make us human?  In Blade Runner, Rachel has memories that are apparently not her own and rather Tyrell's niece's, making her much less likely to be human.  Yet at the end of the film it is demonstrated that the androids have memories of there own, and despite having a four year lifespan, they desire to live longer.

Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer)

Mathey, Minority Report

In Minority Report, "criminals" are treated really badly. Even though they did not commit the crime, they are considered criminals because the Pre Cogs have seen their intentions and are always right. However, there is a glitch in the system of pre-crime. When the three pre cogs do not agree on a crime, it creates a minority report which is never going to be revealed otherwise, it would mean that pre-crime cannot be trusted and therefore would have to be shut down. This glitch is used by the bad guy in the movie by trying to make the pre cogs see one crime instead of two. However, Agatha, the more gifted of the pre cogs do not fall for it and warns John Anderton (Tom Cruise) of what is going on. In Terri Murray's essay, "Our Post Moral Future", she argues with the fact that if someone has not committed a crime, he/she cannot be convicted before it happens. She gives an example by citing the opposite. Should we reward people for good intentions before a virtuous deed is done? No we shouldn't so why should we arrest people and treat them as outcast based on their intentions and not their actual actions. So if I went to my friend and said joking " I'm going to kill you" will I be considered a criminal? This would be absurd. I understand that safety should be a priority in this world but at what price. The sacrifice to lose all privacy and control over our life. Becoming puppets of our own world and being scared just to think. The way the criminals are treated in the movie is just horrible. A halo is placed on their head where they would watch their crime over and over again for the rest of their life while being in tube like cells underground. This is even worst than what we do to prisoners in society, at least they have rights and have the chance to prove themselves innocent. In the movie, they just get arrested and are put straight into hibernation state. When were their rights cited? " You have the right to remain silent until you speak to a lawyer, if you do not have one, one will be assigned to you..." Where would the world be without rights ? Indepence is based on them. I do not think that potential criminals like the ones in the movie should be tortured that much. Of course we would live in a crime free place, but I would be scared of the government more than criminals in this case. The power that they acquired based on three genetically modified humans (pre cogs) is just scary.

Malveaux - Minority Report

Minority Report is a film by Philip K. Dick that explores the concept of distributing consequences to someone before their crime ever takes place based on foreknowledge provided by what the film refers to as “precogs”.  The film, set in 2054 Washington, D.C., presumes that any intended act in the future that does harm to society in any capacity is a crime. 

The “precogs, three physics, uses their gift of foretelling the future to determine who, where, when, and at what time someone will commit the crime. The police unit, led by Tom Cruise, then seeks out the pre-determined perpetrator and prosecutes them for the crime they haven’t committed “yet”. According to Terri Murray, in the article Our Post-Moral Future?, a crime is meaningless until it is done, and is a crime precisely because it is done therefore redefining the meaning. Murray also argues that the definition of a criminal is retrospective because the freedom that allows a criminal to choose whether or not to commit the crime is the reason he or she is defined a criminal should they choose to proceed with the act. This is an important concept that isn’t explored in Minority Report. 

The precogs foresee the crime and the police unit acts upon it. Their intentions are to prevent murders, however, they are stripping away someone’s inalienable right, which is free will. What viewer’s should ask themselves after watching this film is at what does a police unit’s obligation to capture criminals infringe upon a person’s right to have private thoughts. 

Penland: Minority Report

In the 2002 film, Minority Report, an experimental police force in Washington, D.C. arrests future murderers based on the visions of three precogs; Agatha, Dashiell, and Arthur. The police force is lead by Captain Joe Anderton (Tom Cruise), who studies the precogs’ visions, gathering clues and information to find the potential murderer. Once he figures out where the murderer is, he and the police force race to arrest him, before the crime is committed, essentially eliminating crime for six years in the D.C. area.

The criminals in this movie are treated as outcasts. Their basic rights are stripped from them; the crime they were arrested for never even happened. Although the precogs are supposed to always be right about a murder, the murderers were only arrested because of something that was going to happen. Terri Murray’s essay, “Our Post-Mortal Future?” addresses this issue, saying “a ‘crime’ is meaningless unless it is done, and is a crime precisely because it is done” (137). This essay shows that the future criminals of this movie were treated unfairly because they never actually committed the crime.

One glitch with this system lies with the precogs. The precogs are human, and could have missed a murder, which does happen in the movie. The murder of Agatha’s birth mother is predicted by the precogs, and prevented from happening. However, the true murderer knows the glitch of the precogs, and commits the murder the same exact way as before. The precogs see this murder, however, the files are erased because it appears to be an echo, which is what happens when a particularly horrific murder is committed, and the precogs see the murder twice. This glitch in the system questions the reliability of the precogs, making the audience wonder if the other murders would have actually happened.

After the criminals were arrested, a police officer placed a futuristic headband on them, forcing them into a sleep-like state, where they could only see their murder over and over again for the rest of their lives. The criminals were then placed in a tube and put underground with the rest of the future criminals, basically tortured with the same image for the rest of their lives. This part of the movie was horrifying to me, because the criminals were completely de-humanized. They became merely bodies without souls after they were placed in these tubes. They were treated worse than the criminals we have today; they literally had no freedom, no movement, and no sunlight.

This clip shows how people in this movie have very little privacy because their eyes are scanned everywhere.

Isaacson: Blade Runner

The central element of Blade Runner is the ambiguity of humanity and the human experience. Occurring in dystopic future where science and technology has greater power over culture than the dreams of the people that inhabit it. In this future humans have perfected "replicants," artificial persons who are exploited by "real" humans as commodities despite the claim by their maker, the Tyrrell Corporation, that they are "more human than human." Humans also remove two of the primary lifelong motivators from the replicants, the ability to have pass on pieces of themselves through offspring and the uncertainty of death, because they cannot reproduce and they have a four year lifespan. This is similar to the controls placed on AIs in William Gibson's Neuromancer and it comes to a similar conclusion; replicants are banned on Earth and an found are "terminated" by a Blade Runner, a police officer specifically trained and authorized to kill replicants.

However, despite theses small differences, the film is incredibly ambiguous as to who really is human. It's obvious that the replicants Deckard, the protagonist and highly skilled Blade Runner, has been hired to terminate are not human; also clear is Rachel's status as a replicant. However, the humanity of ever other character in the film is open to interpretation. We are told by Tyrrell, with the introduction of Rachel, that she believes herself to be human and had false memories of her life before her manufacture implanted so that she might be more human, or at least more emotionally controllable. Both of the Blade Runners, Deckard and Gaff, are solitary men that do not have familial connection and that share many of the eccentricities of the replicants. For example, replicants become heavily emotionally involved with certain objects, perhaps because of the very limited time they have to interact with them; everywhere that Gaff goes he makes an origami figure out of available everyday objects, a bizarre sentimentalization of objects and wish for a personal history when considering this hardened killer. Through this we are also given one of our biggest clues for Deckard identity as a replicant; he dreams/remembers a sequence where a unicorn is running through a field and the final origami that Gaff leaves him is a unicorn, suggesting that Deckard's memories or desires are a scientific matter of filed data which Gaff has access to in the same way that he had access to Rachel's memories. Other characters in the film, from Bryant to Tyrrell himself, are circumspect in their humanity, particularly since none of them can be sure of their own humanity either. Thus, the line between replicant and human is blurred to the point where lifespan and involved emotional response are the only real indicators of the difference; the continued discrimination against replicants is not a matter of their inhumanity but of their inability to effectively fight back given their four year lifespan. They are useful to the ambitions of "real" humans so, much like our slaves now and historically, their humanity is not an issue that the slavemaster is concerned with.

Glickert, Blade Runner

The 1982 Ridley Scott film, Blade Runner, is a science-fiction thriller based on a Philip K. Dick short story concerning genetically-engineered organic robots, or "Replicants". The film takes place in Los Angeles, year 2019.  The replicants were created by the Tyrell Corporation to perform slave-like work in off-world colonies.  The government has banned the use of and even the existence of replicants on planet Earth.  Special police forces known as "Blade Runners" have been hired to track down replicants illegally roaming the Earth.  The main scientific difference - as well as the basis for philosophical difference - between humans and replicants is that the designed lifespan of a replicant is limited to four years, presumably preventing them from developing emotional feelings.  The story's protagonist, retired police officer Rick Deckard, agrees to an assignment as a Blade Runner.  He uses the replicants' proposed lack of emotional feelings as a means to uncover illegal replicants through a series of questions that are intended to induce emotion in non-replicants.
         The philosophical aspect of the film centers around the question of what exactly is a human, and what is the proper indicator of humanity. The tests that Deckard performed were based on emphatic measures, but the dim representation of Los Angeles showed deficient compassion by "real" humans. In addition, many replicants actually showed signs of compassion toward each other, despite the preventative measures (4-year lifespans) put in place by Tyrell.  The film even offers doubt as to whether Deckard is actually human himself.  To me, this begs a few questions. First, in this grim, semi-apocalyptic world, to what extent does it matter if someone is produced "naturally" or "manufactured".  In respect to the world today, we are seeing a strong decrease in natural/traditional births with advancements in science. Second, who should be the one to decide whether replicants are "good" or "bad", "right" or "wrong".  If the world were to succumb to such a morally corrupt state like Scott represented, then I don't see any justification for one to say that replicants are bad or wrong, because they are in no way worse than "natural" humans in terms of harm done to society and to themselves.