Who is the author of the situation?

To find the answer to this question we must first define what an author is and what it does. The author is in control of the story and the aspects of the story i.e. plot, characters, action, etc. This, of course, is my definition of what an author does. The author of a movie is something or somebody that controls what is in the shot/the frame(whoever or whatever controls what you are looking at). Point of view shots are widely used and accepted as telling who is the author of a certain shot. So when watching those four films in class today I looked for things that controlled what was within the frame. The author of that specific space. And I came out with this conclusion:

Tree - The wind was the author. It was in control of everything within the shot. It blows the tree, the subject of the shot, and the camera moves as if it is being blown by the same wind that is blowing the tree. This causes the viewer to feel as if it is moving along with the tree, becoming one with the tree.

One Black/One White - The white dog is the author. The white dog is in control of the other subject(the black dog) and the black dog's actions. It walks from dog bowl to dog bowl forcing the black dog to go eat at the other dog bowl. The black dog becomes submissive and allows the white dog to take over the bowl that it was eating at and moves onto the other bowl without fighting back. The white dog seems more aggressive, dominant, and competitive.

Two Dogs and a Ball - The ball is the author. The ball controls the dogs(the subjects) within the shot. It specifically controls the dogs' eye movements while they sit in place. Their bodies adjust accordingly to the movements of their eyes. The viewer is drawn in and starts to follow the dogs' eyes in hope of finally catching a glimpse of what the dogs are following with their eyes.

My Parents Read Dreams I Have Had About Them - The dreams that are written on the papers are the authors. They control what the parents say. The parents are just puppets to portray/bring about the dreams. The dad reads dreams that the dreamer has had about him and the mom reads dreams that the dreamer has had about her. What bothered me the most was the indifference the parents showed. They delivered the dreams with a very mundane tone of voice, I don't know if this was implied or if the parents thought it was a stupid idea to be filming this or maybe they are just too old. But, if I were them I would ask the dreamer about the dreams and try to come to a conclusion why he had them. I mean, if I were a part of the dreams that means that I was significant in that person's life, either in a bad way or a good way.

Althea Thauberger

Thauberger's "Not Afraid to Die" really had an effect on me. It was a very sad, emotional piece. Because of the gestures the girl gives, the indifference in her eyes, the slow methodical movements of her eating the snack, and the eerie calm of the woods noises gives a sense of
loneliness. She looks at the camera as if it's a cry of help. Then the lyrics come in and it's as if the lyrics are her inner thoughts expressing how she really feels. The lyric, "I'm in a dark hole" acts like a blatant sign of her loneliness.
What I liked about this film is how it relies very heavily on emotion. The emotion is drawn out through the girl. And as it is explained in the article we read, the human being impulse to empathize is irrepressible. We long to connect, we want to connect, we need relationships to be sane. "We look at artworks in order to see ourselves reflected, to feel not alone, and to identify with a speaking, empowered subject". The empowered subject in "Not Afraid to Die" is the girl. And different parts of films can affect people in different ways. Characters, a song, dialogue, or even events in the film all have the ability to affect the viewer. Althea even mentioned that "Not Afraid to Die" had many different reactions ranging from this being a funny film, to a film about buliema. This whole idea of connecting to artwork has taken on a new form in the 21st century. Now people have the chance to connect with blogs, youtube videos, google videos, and etc on the internet. The internet is a vast plane to show artwork and to allow viewers to participate in the artwork. The internet has become a more accessible way to reach artworks. And with such websites like youtube, anyone can become an artist just by posting a video on it.
Art is very personal. It is argued that no great artwork has ever been created by someone without an inner struggle. I direct reference would be Althea's "A Memory Lasts Forever". The whole story is about something that happened to her in the past. Maybe this was Althea's way of confronting the issue. Because this is a very personal film much emotion is played throughout the characters. It becomes very poignant and draws in the audience. There is so much emotion that we want to be part of it. It's our impulse to empathize. We want to help them out, tell them we are there for you.

Deadpan

While watching those four short films in class I couldn't help but notice how slow paced all the films were. My written question for that class was asking why these filmmakers decided to use this slow pacing. These films were a complete contrast from what we have today in theaters. The movies nowadays are very fast-paced, and full of action, once you sit down you sit back up again. I was thinking about what professor Carl Bogner said about deadpan and then it hit me. To produce deadpan such slow pacing, as we saw in these films, is essential to create its affect. In Semiotics of the Kitchen deadpan is in clear effect through the movements of Martha Rosler's body. She delivers these movements without any expression or reservation. Deadpan can only be delivered through expression and emotion. A clear example of this emotionless expression is provided by Buster Keaton. He keeps a dead beat face all throughout his films, which involve an array of stunts where he is humiliated and physically put in harm creating an offbeat laughter. I think because you wouldn't expect his face to be that emotionless in such crazy stunts that it creates a certain laughter. Deadpan, to me, is the opposite of what we would normally see in a comedy. Although it is a more rare form of comedy, deadpan can be used in all forms of comedy, like slap-stick, situational, etc. So deadpan becomes an acquired taste.

Play

To me, all of these trick films are eye candy. Very entertaining. They draw you in with those tricks and then you can't wait to see what will happen next. When I go to the movies I want to see something that can take my imagination to the next level and all of these types of trick films are very imaginative and creative. They are like children storybooks, mixing fantasy with reality and allowing us to join in on the adventure. I could watch A Trip to the Moon today and it will still blow me away. The trick cuts it uses are brilliant, like when they hit the bad moon guys they poof into smoke. I guess these films pioneered the way for special effects and animation that we see in films today. These types of films create a surreal environment, almost like a dream because you can't believe what you're seeing. I wish more of these films were around today. Spectacle, nowadays, is less emphasized than narrative is. The only person I can think of that does these spectacle types of films is Michel Gondry. Everything is not what it seems in his films. I think cinema needs to find a way to make films that have a balanced mix of both spectacle and narrative.