Writing

One of the most celebrated contemporary Spanish filmmakers, a director who has interestingly managed to marry popular success and auteurist prestige.

Pedro Almodóvar is a highly prolific director, who has managed to maintain a steady stream of film releases, most of which have been produced by the company he runs together with his brother Agustin (El Deseo).

In keeping with the narrative conventions of the genres he is usually exploring, Almodóvar often privileges intricate plots in which coincidence and chance play a significant part. The focus is often placed on queer identities and on the performance of gender.

Sexuality in his films is portrayed as eminently fluid, families are often dysfunctional, relationships are unorthodox and complicated, often involving more than two people, and the stories are laced with references to literary and art works, as well as to other films (intertextuality). In addition to references to other works, Almodóvar has also been known to reference his own films (for instance, his 2009 film Broken Embraces references his earlier 1988 film Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown).

Visual design is central to his films and he is widely considered to be a fashion-conscious director, who pays meticulous attention to set and costume design, often marked by his characteristic flamboyance.

One of the genres within the framework of which Almodóvar frequently works is melodrama (often combined with comedy and/or a crime story). Melodrama is one of the most studied genres in the history of cinema; amongst the scholars who have written on the topic are Thomas Elsaesser, Stanley Cavell, Barbara Klinger.

Most scholars discuss melodrama with reference to its expressivity, its ability to elicit strong emotions through its style (in particular, through mise-en-scène and the use of music – in fact, melodrama is often defined as a ‘dramatic narrative accompanied by music’), but also in terms of the moral universe it typically articulates, one that is polarised around victims and evildoers. Typical plots may include stories of star-crossed lovers, forced marriages, crimes of passion, tortuous and tense family relationships and situations, stories of injustice and maltreatment etc., which allow themes such as redemption, innocence, disillusionment, guilt and the clash between individual desires and social pressures to be examined in depth. Oftentimes, melodramas feature virtuous heroines who suffer sexual and/or emotional aggression at the hands of a villain.

Thomas Elsaesser, ‘Tales of Sound and Fury: Observations on the Family Melodrama’, in Landy, Marcia (ed.) (1991) Imitations of Life, pp.68-91.

‘… when in ordinary language we call something melodramatic, what we often mean is an exaggerated rise-and-fall pattern in human actions and emotional responses, a from-the-sublime-to-the-ridiculous movement, a foreshortening of lived time in favour of intensity – all of which produces a graph of much greater fluctuation, a quicker swing from one extreme to the other than is considered natural, realistic or in conformity with literary standards of verisimilitude..’ (p.76)

At a later point in his essay (p.83), Elsaesser comes back to this strategy of ‘letting the emotions rise and then bringing them suddenly down with a thump’, causing a ‘vertiginous drop in the emotional temperature’ which he considers to be central to the emotional experience afforded by many melodramas and which we can see at work in Almodóvar’s melodramas too.

Grizzly Man (Werner Herzog, 2005) was a successful theatrically released documentary. It had the advantage of a well known director: Werner Herzog.

The film has two narratives. The first, and most prominent, is the narrative of Herzog who, in reflexive documentary style, is revealed to be making an expose about the life and death of Timothy Treadwell, who died in 2003.

However, we also see Treadwell’s footage – footage that Herzog himself admires. This footage is representative of direct cinema (observational documentary). Treadwell filmed his surroundings and nature as they transpired in front of him. In doing so, as Herzog admits, he gained some stunning insights into the natural world.

Despite Treadwell’s footage, we also see him as a performer in his own right. Doing more than one take – mainly because he plans to edit his footage into a larger presentation and, therefore, he wants to look good.

There is still evidence of manipulation even from Treadwell. As Herzog reveals, although Treadwell would portray himself as someone braving out the wilds of Alaska alone, his girlfriend filmed some of his footage – something he chose not to reveal (again, returning us to questions about whether documentary is ever anything but manipulative!)

Herzog also chooses what footage we are permitted to see and even listen to. For instance, the director opts not to let us hear the final moments of Treadwell’s death. There has been conjecture about why this decision was made.

Werner Herzog’s documentary style is derived from his experience of filmmaking. As a well-known film director, he has already composed his own film aesthetics and adopted them into documentary skilfully. He masters the camera use in regard of perspectives and composition.

For instance, in Grizzly Man, as Davidson (1986, p20) elaborated, “his camera pans with measured grace the vast stretches of” the snow-berg, in which, the illustration of the wild, tranquil but isolated landscape heavily indicates Timothy Treadwell’s inevitable lonesome and the soreness of his soul". The film language like this, combines the documented footage with iconic interference, which is commented by Steingrover (2012, p474) as “an affective experience for the spectator through carefully constructed characters that highlight the themes of mystery and tragedy.” It displays Herzog’s intention of “transforming things that are physically there into more intensified, elevated and stylized images” (Cronin, 2002, p301).

Definition of the remake

Film or television remake = a film or television series based on an earlier film or television series.

Linda Hutcheon considers the remake to be a sub-type of adaptation (‘remakes are invariably adaptations because of changes in context’), but a sub-type of adaptation which does not involve ‘a shift of medium or mode of engagement’. Remakes are also a form of intertextuality.

If the original film is an adaptation to begin with, then we are dealing with a triangular or triadic relationship (literary source – original film – remake), but many times the original film is not an adaptation, in which case we are dealing with what Constantine Verevis calls in his book Film Remakes (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 2006) a diadic relationship (original film – remake).

The Japanese film Ringu = based on the novel Ring by Kôji Suzuki, who collaborated in an advisory capacity to the script development of both the Japanese adaptation and the American remake.

Rather than being a re-adaptation of the novel, the Hollywood film reworks the Japanese film, but the films are products of two different horror traditions.

The narrative in both films focuses on a female journalist (Reiko in the Japanese version, Rachel in the Hollywood remake) who investigates unsolved cases of people dying seven days after watching a mysterious videotape.

There is a rich tradition in Japanese culture of ghost stories centred around a vengeful female spirit, and the Japanese film situates itself within this tradition.

An additional theme in the films – the fear of technology (technophobia) as the videotape is the means through which the horrific female character manages to make the transition from one realm to another.

Body horror – Sadako/Samara’s physical appearance – the long black hair hiding her facial features, the dripping white clothes, the removed nails, the swollen feet etc. – different details emphasised in the Japanese version and the Hollywood remake.

Sadako/Samara crossing the boundary between the supernatural and the natural world in the two versions (the Japanese original and the US remake) – differences in setting: despite the time of day being similar, the Japanese interior is darker, more sparsely decorated and feels cramped, while in the American version, the interior is more spacious, thus allowing for more possibilities of evasion, encouraging the viewer to hope for an escape for the male protagonist under attack (especially since the interior shots are cross-cut with shots of Rachel (Naomi Watts) rushing to Noah’s apartment); the sequence in its two different treatments relies on different cultural notions of suspense and horror

The Mummy: Tomb of Dragon Emperor starts its narrative from Chinese Qin dynasty. To summarize the plot, Zi Yuan (Michel Yoeh), a witch, curses Qin Shi Huang Di (Jet Li) into a terracotta statue since he kills her lover General Ming. Thousand years later, Rick (Brendan Fraser) is tricked to China, and awakens Emperor Qin and his army. Together with his wife Evelyn (Maria Bello) and his son Alex (Luke Ford), an archaeology student, and the skeletons woken by Zi Yuan, he manages to stop the return of Emperor Qin’s authority and tyranny in Chinese landscape.

The stereotypical images of China and Chinese people are basically all represented in this film. Ziyuan, for example, is characterized as one of most problematic roles of Chinese women—the dragon lady. She is a witch, mysterious and strong; she is able to turn humans into status, deceitful and dominative. These are all representative features of the dragon ladies (Herbst, 1997, p72). Furthermore, the Chinese male protagonist Emperor Qin is also conceptualized with a cliché view, where his evilness and cruelty make him a complete reflection of Fu Manchu.

Here, the history of Qin dynasty is noteworthy. In 221BC, the Qin dynasty was established by the “first sovereign emperor” Qin Shi Huang Di. He managed to reform the authority of law, reorganize local administration and develop the production rate such as in terms of agriculture, benefiting the overall sovereign and order of China (Pletcher, 2011, p56). To defend the security of Chinese Central Plains, Emperor Qin initiated to construct the great wall, stopping the invasion of “the barbarian intrusion” (Bodde, 2008, p63). Meanwhile, it is undeniable that the first Chinese emperor exerted his authority ruthlessly and cruel. For example, “millions of people were dragooned to the huge construction jobs, many dying on the long journey to their destination” (Pletcher, 2011, p58). Nevertheless, the “stone inscriptions of his time that he had corrected the misconduct of a corrupted age and given the people peace and order” (Pletcher, 2011, p58). Therefore, these strict strategies brought about positive transformations to China and reformed the chaotic and war-tone Central Plains area into a united country. To rewards this contribute, after his sudden death, over 6000 life-size soldier statues were buried near to his tomb in Xi’an, being renowned as the eighth wonder of the world (Man, 2008, p204).

Compared with the real history, the version presented in this film is as well troublesome. Emperor Qin is only portrayed as a violent emperor who is willing to dominate the world, but his historical attributions towards Chinese society are fully overlooked. His evilness can be exemplified by his embodiment of a dragon. During the fight between the western characters and Chinese terracotta army, Emperor Qin becomes a three-headed dragon that is able to spit fire and destroy lives. Nevertheless, the concept of dragon believed by western people is completely different from that of the East.

In most western folktales, legends and myths, most dragons have more than one head. This is supported by Zhao (1992, p54) that “Demanding sacrifices, and crawling in filth, most Western dragons shed all positive connotations and took the part of destructive loners, isolated aliens coning from a strange and dangerous land”, as “a representation of the paradoxical nature of evil”. By contrast, in Chinese notion, dragon is considered as “an ambivalent rain-god” (Zhao, 1992, p71). Its symbolic aspects include “worship of the sovereign, ancestor cult, and the wish for fertility”; it is enigmatic but has positive influence, so that “Confucians often take it as a concrete emblem of the emperor” (Zhao, 1992, p74). In this case, it is clear that in this film, the three-headed dragon applies the cruelty of western dragon into Chinese context inappropriately to establish a ruthless image of Emperor Qin.

The wrong translation of Chinese lines also exaggerates Emperor Qin’s atrocity. Before the battle starts, Qin Shi Huang Di announces the following sentences in Chinese:

尔 等 醒 于 今 ， 止 世 上 混 乱 腐 败 ， 必 恢 复 法 制 。 朕 必 须 夺 回 天 下 ， 绝 自 由 余 患 。 朕 告 尔 等 ， 威 望 广 施 正 义 于 天 下……

The English translations, as official subtitles, are as follows:

“Today you awake to a world in the grip of chaos and corruption. I will restore order. I will restore what is mine. I will crush ant idea of freedom……I raise you for one purpose to enforce my will on the entire world.

There are many important Chinese terms neglected in the English translation. Literally, for “必恢复法制”, instead of “I will restore order”, the more accurate one should be “I will restore law and order”. The phrase “正 义 (integrity)” is also replaced with “my will”. These small but generalized mistranslations change the Chinese meanings subtly but significantly, manifesting Emperor Qin from the one who pursues law, order and integrity into a merciless tyrant who only keens to achieve his own authority. These features denote the film’s deliberate disrespect or ignorance of Chinese culture, and unveil the Orientalist misunderstanding and prejudice against China in a manipulative manner (Sun, 2008, p53).

Written and directed by Spike Jonze, Her (2012) is a science-fiction film that features a romantic relationship between its male protagonist Theodore Twombly (Joaquin Phoenix) and a disembodied female AI character called Samantha (voiced by Scarlett Johansson). Theodore is a talented ghost writer working for a company which specializes in customized love letters. Ironically, while he celebrating love and marriage, he fails on both counts in his personal life. Being devastated by his pending divorce with his wife Catherine (Rooney Mara), he accidentally sees an advertisement promoting an artificial intelligent operating system (OS) and downloaded one for himself. With a female voice, the personified Samantha brings changes to Theodore’s life.

Theodore soon falls in love with the feminized OS; his obsession with Samantha, however, can be correlated to her personalization, which empowers Samantha’s control over Theodore from the beginning of the film. Here, a theory of ‘filter bubble’ is worthy of attention. Discussing online filters, Eli Pariser (2011) addressed they function to establish ‘a unique universe of information’ for each users, which amplifies individuals’ ‘desire for things that are familiar’ and tailors people with a world of preference. Therefore, instead of being exposed to different kinds of ideas and opinions, online platforms such as searching engines and social media actually trap their users in a loop of self, grounding them in familiarity. From another perspective, this represents how humans’ ideas are constructed or even manipulated by technology and information.

This, nonetheless, is actually the way in which Samantha works, which can be first of all exemplified from her first conversation with Theodore. When Theodore mentions that everything about him is disorganized, Samantha directly proposes “Mind if I look through your hard drive?” Theodore hesitates a little and says okay. At once, a number of 3-D version files are visible on Theodore’s desktop, giving him anxieties. This sequence unfolds a detail that Samantha has access to all his information, from emails, searching history, preference to his interaction with the world. Thus, to Samantha, Theodore is completely transparent, while for Theodore, Samantha is mysterious and enigmatic. Her mystery can be simply traced from the film title: ““her” rather than “she”, the object of a man's perception and entranced bafflement” (Rainer, 2013, internet). In this case, Samantha is empowered in this relationship; she can always responds to Theodore based on his preferences and agreements, creating an illusion for Therdore that she is a perfect soul mate.

Samantha's exertion of control can also be evident by her way of handling romantic relationships. Near the end of this film, Samantha dose not reply Theodore’s call because she is with other OSes upgrading the system. Theodore is panic about her disappearance and he even slams onto the ground when looking for her panically. Relaxing on the subway step, he finally connects to Samantha. However, this rare and short term of separation drags him back to reality by paying attention to other people around who are like him, talking to their phones, smiling, which drives him to doubt if Samantha is talking to or falling in love with others simultaneously.

Samantha then confesses that when she is talking to and falling in love with Theodore, other 8316 conversations and in 641 romantic relationships are still ongoing. This is completely beyond Theodore’s comprehension and manifests Samantha’s uniqueness in terms of romantic relationship. Compared with most human beings who believe in monogamy, Samantha’s ideology is distinctive. To Theodore, her multiple relationships is her betrayal on him; to Samantha, however, this is unstoppable and natural in her mechanical mind.

Therefore, Samantha can occupies the dominated position in her relationship with Theodore because of her ability of handling different romantic relationships. From her programmed various personalities, she may also adjust herself to different types for other customers. In face of Theodore, she is Samantha, funny, smart and helpful; in front of others, though, she may adopt different characteristics. Therefore, their positions in this romantic relationship are never equal and never will be. This is why when Theodore questions about her loyalty and selfishness, Samantha can only respond: “I am yours and I am not yours”.

Samantha’s manipulation somehow generates a positive consequence. After Samantha leaves, Theodore sits in front of the French window, giving himself a closure of the divorce. As a ghost writer, he finally expresses himself in his words; he apologizes to his ex-wife for his former behaviors, smiling when sending the email to her. This series of reactions denote that he is afterall cured from his depression. In this case, it seems Samantha, as a commercial product, a conscious OS, perfectly finishes her job of opening up new possibilities for her customer, indicating her positive influence on human beings and the celebration of technophilia in this film.