Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Course Objectives:
Film is the newest of the art forms, and the most popular style of entertainment of the
past century. Movies are one of the most powerful tools for shaping popular tastes and beliefs,
including perceptions and expectations concerning the government, the workplace, religion, and
the family. The influence of cinema on politics is high; so too is the impact of external political,
social and economic forces on movies and the film industry. This class is designed as an
exploration of the complex dynamics between film and politics.
Our class will be structured around two organizing principles: genre and national film
movements. Genres are identifiable by their shared conventions, iconography, techniques, and
traditions. They allow for certain problems to be worked out, and basic themes expressed. We
will explore the politics of a number of distinct genres, including the romantic comedy, Western,
film noir, and horror film. National movements in film are concentrated within certain times and
spaces, with a collection of film-makers self-consciously sharing similar assumptions or
operating within the same institutional frameworks. Often these moments in world cinema occur
in conjunction with moments of political turmoil. We will explore a number of different
moments in national film history, in France, China, Iran, Italy, the former Soviet Union and the
United States.
Each week, we will explore a single film from a number of different contexts. We will
animate the political and social concerns behind the film’s theme and chart the histories of
government influence upon the fate of each film. We will explore how each film exemplifies a
particular national film movement, or reflects the evolving identity of a specific movie genre.
We will also learn how to “read” a film, in order to better comprehend how its messages are
conveyed through style, editing, shot composition, and other techniques of film making.
2
Course Requirements
Attendance and Participation: An important requirement for this honors seminar will be active
participation in class discussion, debate and analysis. Regular attendance is required, and the
professor will take attendance for each class. Please bring to class each day the texts under
discussion – we will be referring to particular passages regularly. Each student is expected to
have completed the day’s readings before class, and to have watched the week’s film before
Thursday’s class. Be prepared to talk. Everyone will be expected to demonstrate civility and a
respect for the thoughts, opinions and beliefs of others. Notes or summaries will not be provided
for missed classes. Cell phones and all other electronic noise-makers should be turned off (not
on vibrate) during class. Because of the frequency by which many students using laptops to take
notes also succumb to the temptations to surf the Web, check email, IM, or otherwise disengage
themselves from class discussions, laptop use will not be permitted during class.
Essays: There are no exams or research papers required in this class. Each student will be
responsible for completing six take-home essays. Four of these essays will each cover the films
and readings from one week of the syllabus. Students may choose which weeks they would
prefer to write, with two limitations: All students must submit at least one assignment in the first
four weeks, and one assignment in the last three weeks. For the fifth essay, students will select
one film from the list of recommended films, which can be found at the bottom of this syllabus.
For the sixth essay, students can choose any film they would like to write about, and select one
reading (the length of an article or book chapter) in conjunction with the film. Dr. Dow reserves
the right of veto over the film choice, and will help select appropriate readings.
All of these essays will be approximately 5 pages in length, double spaced with twelve point
font, and will cover both assigned readings, as well as lecture and discussion material. Each of
the first five essays will each be worth 14% of the final grade; taken together they will be worth
70% of the final grade. The sixth essay, of your own choosing, will be worth 15% of the final
grade. Participation and quizzes will make up the remaining 15% of the final grade.
Films: Each week will feature a single film, exemplifying that week’s topic, which students are
expected to have watched outside of class prior to the discussion. We will not be screening any
films during class time, although we will view clips as part of our analysis. Our Thursday class
will be devoted to a roundtable style conversation about this film. The key rule of our film
analyses is that everyone participates – no one merely listens. I will make my personal copy of
each film available for viewing in the CV Lounge at least one week before our discussion, and it
will be the responsibility of each student to watch the film (and complete the readings specific to
each film) before our class discussion. Most of the films will also be placed on reserve in the
McDermott Library, where they may be viewed as well. Of course students may also choose to
rent or purchase the films themselves. If you are not downloading the films directly onto your
computer or using a service like Netflicks, or if you would simply like to browse a well stocked
video store, I would recommend Premiere Video. [5400 E Mockingbird Lane # 104 Dallas, TX
3
75206-5381, (214) 827-8969, right off of I-75]. It is the largest DVD rental store in Texas, and
has a huge selection of all film styles.
Student Choice Week: Thursday, April 21, I will be out of town, attending an academic
conference. Our class will still meet, at the regular class time, to discuss a film. Rather than pre-
selecting the film to discuss that week, students will vote on what film they would like to
discuss, from a list I will distribute. Once students have selected a film, I will assign relevant
readings to accompany it, which we will discuss as a class on Tuesday, April 19.
Quizzes: Most classes will begin with a brief quiz covering the readings or the film that we will
be discussing that day. These quizzes will test recollection of the reading material and will aid as
a starter for class discussion. The accumulation of quizzes, combined with attendance and the
quality of participation (especially during the roundtables), will account for 15% of the final
grade.
Make-Ups: Make-up exams will be given only in documented emergency situations and at the
discretion of the professor.
Syllabus Changes: The professor reserves the right to amend this syllabus during the semester.
Any changes will be announced in class, and students will be responsible for getting and
following the new information.
Grading Scale: All exams will be graded on a 100-point scale. The following conversion chart
will be used to translate numbers into letter grades:
University Policies
All of the requirements and processes contained in this syllabus and made by the
professor shall comply with university wide policies. For more information on UTD’s academic
policies, including student conduct and discipline, religious holidays, academic integrity, email
use, withdrawal from the class, grievance policies, incomplete grade policies, and disability
services, please go to: http://go.utdallas.edu/syllabus-policies
4
Course Schedule:
January 11: Introductions
Syllabus
Ed Howard. “Chaotic Bodies: The Firemen’s Ball Beauty Pageant” (July 2008)
Raymond Durgnat and Scott Simmon. “Six Creeds that Won the West” from The Western
Reader (Limelight Editions, 1998), pp. 59-84.
Doug Williams. “Pilgrims and the Promised Land: A Genealogy of the Western” from The
Western Reader (Limelight Editions, 1998), pp. 93-114.
Edward Buscombe. “The Western” from Oxford History of World Cinema (Oxford University
Press, 1996), pp. 286-293.
Robert B. Pippen. “Politics and Self-Knowledge in The Searchers” from Hollywood Westerns
and American Myth: The Importance of Howard Hawks and John Ford for Political Philosophy
(Yale University Press, 2010), pp. 102-140.
Paul Schrader. “Notes on Film Noir” (1972) from Film Noir Reader (Limelight Editions, 1996)
Janey Place and Lowell Peterson. “Some Visual Motifs of Film Noir” (1974) from Film Noir
Reader (Limelight Editions, 1996)
5
Robert Porfirio. “Some Visual Motifs in the Film Noir” (1976) from Film Noir Reader
(Limelight Editions, 1996)
Andrew Britton. “Detour” from The Book of Film Noir (Continuum, 1993), pp. 174-183.
Charles Musser. “Extending the Boundaries: Cinema-Verite and the New Documentary”, from
The Oxford University of World Cinema (Oxford University Press, 1996), pp 527-537.
David MacDougall. “Beyond Observational Cinema” from Movies and Methods (University of
California Press, 1985), pp. 274-285.
David Denby. The Real Thing” New York Review of Books (November 8, 1990)
Charles Taylor. “Titicut Follies” from Sight and Sound (Spring 1988)
Dan Armstrong. “Wiseman’s Realm of Transgression: Titicut Follies, the Symbolic Father, and
the Spectacle of Confinement” from Cinema Journal (Fall 1989), pp 20-35.
Carl Plantiga. “Documentary” from The Routledge Companion to Philosophy and Film
(Routledge, 2009) pp. 494-504.
Millicent Marcus. Italian Film in the Light of Neorealism (Princeton University Press, 1986), pp.
3-29.
6
Andrew Karia. “Realism” from The Routledge Companion to Philosophy and Film (Routledge,
2009), pp. 237-248.
David Forgacs. Rome, Open City (BFI Publishing, 2000), pp. 6-7, 31-34, 42, 60-71
Kristen Thompson and David Bordwell. “The Death of Pina” from Film History: An
Introduction (McGraw Hill, 2003), p. 365.
Due: Essay on Documentaries and Titicut Follies. All students should have submitted at least one
film essay by this date.
Sergei Eisenstein. “Ivan the Terrible: A Film About the Sixteenth-century Russian Renaissance”
from Selected Writings, Volume III, (BFI Publishing, 1996), pp. 188-192.
Sergei Eisenstein. “Stalin, Molotov and Zhdanov on Ivan the Terrible, Part II” from Selected
Writings, Volume III, (BFI Publishing, 1996), pp. 299-304.
David Bordwell. “Sergei Eisenstein” from The Routledge Companion to Philosophy and Film
(Routledge, 2009), pp. 378-386.
Film: Ivan the Terrible, Parts I and II (Soviet Union, 1943-45) dir. Sergei Eisenstein
Leonid Kozlov. “The Artist and the Shadow of Ivan” from Stalinism and Soviet Cinema
(Routledge, 1993), pp. 109-130.
Robert L. McLaughlin and Sally E. Parry. We’ll Always Have the Movies: American Cinema
During World War II (University Press of Kentucky, 2006), pp. 1-25.
Umberto Eco. “Casablanca or The Cliches are Having a Ball” from Signs of Life in the U.S.A.
(Bedford, 1994)
Robert B. Ray. A Certain Tendency of the Hollywood Cinema, 1930-1980 (Princeton University
Press, 1985), pp. 89-112.
Richard Maltby. “’A Brief Romantic Interlude’: Dick and Jane Go to 3 ½ Seconds of the
Classical Hollywood Cinema” from Post-Theory: Reconstructing Film Studies (University of
Wisconsin Press, 1996), pp. 434-459.
Jo Labanyi. “History and Hauntology, or, What Does One Do with the Ghosts of the Past?:
Reflections on Spanish Film and Fiction of the Post-Franco Period”, from Disremembering the
Dictatorship: the Politics of Memory in the Spanish Transition to Democracy (Rodopi, 2000),
pp. 65–82.
Film: The Devil’s Backbone (Spain, 2001) dir. Guillermo del Toro
Kimberly Chun. “What is a Ghost? An Interview with Guillermo Del Toro." from Cineaste:
America's Leading Magazine on the Art and Politics of the Cinema, 27, no. 2, pp. 28-31, April
2002
Ellen Brinks. “’Nobody’s Children’: Gothic Representation and Traumatic History in The
Devil’s Backbone” JAC (2004), pp. 291-312.
Kristen Thompson and David Bordwell. “The New Wave” from Film History: An Introduction
(McGraw Hill, 2003), pp. 443-448.
Richard Brody. Everything is Cinema: The Working Life of Jean-Luc Godard. (Holt, 2008), pp.
297-311, 323-337
Pauline Kael. “A Minority Movie” from Going Steady (Little, Brown & Co., 1970), pp. 76-84.
Geoff King. New Hollywood Cinema (Columbia University Press, 2002), selections
John Cawelti. “Chinatown and Generic Transformation in Recent American Films” in Film
Theory and Criticism (Oxford University Press, 1992), pp. 498-511.
Kathrina Glitre. “Genre, Cycles, and Critical Traditions” from Hollywood Romantic Comedy:
States of the Union, 1934-1965 (Manchester University Press, 2006), pp. 9-37.
Stanley Cavell. The Same and Different” from Pursuit of Happiness: The Hollywood Comedy of
Remarriage (Harvard University Press, 1981), pp. 229-264.
Azadeh Farahmand. Perspectives on Recent (International Acclaim for) Iranian Cinema, from
New Iranian Cinema : Politics, Representation and Identity (I.B. Tarus, 2002)
“Special Focus on Contemporary Iranian Cinema” Cineaste (Summer 2006), pp. 38-50.
Berys Gaut. “Digital Cinema” from The Routledge Companion to Philosophy and Film
(Routledge, 2009), pp. 75-85.
April 7: 10
Saeed Zeydabadi-Nejad. The Politics of Iranian Cinema: Film and Society in the Islamic
Republic (Routledge, 2010), pp. 34-54, 104-137.
Kyoko Hirano. Mr. Smith Goes to Tokyo: Japanese Cinema under the American Occupation,
1945-1952 (Smithsonian Institution Press, 1992), pp. 47-70.
Yoshikuni Igarashi. Bodies of Memory: Narratives of War in Postwar Japanese Culture, 1945-
1970 (Princeton University Press, 2000), pp. 11-17, 104-106, 114-122.
Chon A. Noriega. “Godzilla and the Japanese Nightmare: When Them! Is U.S.” from Cinema
Journal (1987), pp. 63-75.
TBA
TBA.
Jim Yardley. “Chinese Dam Projects Criticized for Its Human Costs” The New York Times,
November 19, 2007.
Shelly Kraicer. “Chinese Wasteland: Jia Zhangke’s Still Life” from CinemaScope (Issue 29)
Evan Osnos. “The Long Shot” from The New Yorker, May 11, 2009
Due: Essay on Chinese Cinema and Still Life, Thursday, May 5, 5PM
Westerns
The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (USA, 1962) dir. John Ford
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Italy/Spain, 1966) dir. Sergio Leone
Film Noir
Documentary
Italian Neo-Realism
New Hollywood
Romantic Comedy
Chinese Cinema