I figure since I presented today I deserve another ad for my show. Some of you wanted to know what we sound like. Here’s your sample: www.myspace.com/humungoginormous

I read Johnny Cash’s autobiography a few years ago and really hooked into his retrospective take on his life and the people in it. He seemed to be without any personal judgement against people who had hurt him in the past. What I took from it was that you can’t fully understand anyone completely (“Nobody knows anybody, not that well.”) so your judgement is completely arbitrary. Since reading his book, I’ve tried to take on that same mindset and I consider it a real method for personal growth.

There’s a funny similarity to Errol Morris, because with each film that I watch, I begin to gain respect towards behavior that I can’t fully comprehend, and would have ridiculed at a younger age. Even with Vernon, Florida, the first time I just laughed, the second time I connected. With Fast Cheap and Out of Control, I was able to sit there and think, “It’s really wonderful that he can find happiness in naked mole rats.” It wouldn’t exactly be my choice, but I can respect it. The giggles of seemingly ridiculous vocations are gone. By the time we get to this film we’ve dealt with the Morris issues so much that the message just pops out. This is life, this is death, this is beauty and truth all rolled into one. It’s robots, it’s mole rats, it’s lions, it’s topiary animals and it’s whatever you want to do with your energy that makes it all worthwhile. 

Also according to the guy in Vernon, Florida, humans have a five track mind. Meanwhile, in this film, Dave Hoover confirms that lions only have a one track mind. Just an interesting point.

So this weekend, come see my band, Humungo Ginormous. It’ll be educational.  Thanks to my film geektitude, we reference the following movies in the lyrics: Frankenstein, Dracula, Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Halloween, Nightmare on Elm Street, The Day The Earth Stood Still, Star Wars, The Wild One, Rebel Without a Cause, Back to the Future, and Freaks (which we saw some of today).

Here’s the poster with the info:

I just wanted to do a little post on the composer of The Thin Blue Line’sscore. I’m not an expert on music by any means, but Glass’ compositions, particularly the ones that he does for films, always project an inquisitive mood onto me as a listener. I do not think I’m alone with this, because Errol Morris seems to take that minimalist attitude and match it beautifully with films that incorporate the act of searching. The repetitive pattern with ever so slight variations in notes progressing is the aural act of someone closely examining a text over and over, looking for clues.

I first heard a Glass composition in the deeply hypnotic documentary Koyaanisqatsi. In that film, the music often matches all sorts of movement, both with the camera and with the subjects in front of the camera. Such a synchronized match can lull one into a daze. I have caught this film before while flipping channels and almost been late for class because of lost track of time.

It’s no surprise that later filmmakers implemented his rhythmic movements in ways similar to Morris. Examining most of his film work shows a majority of films where the search for truth is a large factor: The Truman Show (which he did not write specifically for but his work was used in), Secret Window, The Illusionist, and Candyman. I’m extremely excited that his next project will be Woody Allen’s latest drama Cassandra’s Dream. Cassandra? How can that not be about finding out truth? Who knows? Cassandra does. 

This American Life: Death To Wacky – 3/20/98 Ira Glass notes as he exits the theatre after seeing Fast Cheap and Out of Control about how the marketing campaign passes the film off as “wacky.” As we’ve seen, Errol Morris’ movies are never just one thing, so the idea of trashing simplistic generalization to sell more tickets……sort of nice to hear. (Mentions my favorite film Brazil, along with Crumb being marketed as wacky.)

Fresh Air with Terry Gross – 1/5/04 Interview with Morris, mainly about The Fog of War. If you write your paper on the cognate “film” The Fog of War, listen to this 40 minute interview. Even if you don’t write your paper on this, listen to the interview. Morris sounds great even when he’s the one being interviewed. It really focuses on the historical importance of Robert S. McNamara, but it also gets at interviewing techniques.

“This I Believe”: Errol Morris – 5/2/05 Interesting anecdote from Morris’ childhood focusing on the importance of truth.

So I’m checking out the videos that Dr. Campbell nominated, and the EPIC 2014 and EPIC 2015 films are an absolutely fascinating projection of how news and media will operate with future mergers. It really borders on dystopia and while watching I didn’t know whether to be excited or terrified by the potential these companies hold. Hell, we’re already in a world where people can publish their thoughts and observations without the need for a publication, editors, or distribution deals.

The way the 20th century operated in terms of technology and how ideas are exchanged is quickly falling behind us. Just the other day a friend of mine was dropping off her old computer at a friends house. As I took a glance at it I said “Wow, that’s practically an antique.” It was from 2003, had a huge heavy monitor, and in a scant four years already is a vintage item.

Once again I find myself relating to the characters of Vernon, Florida. With this surging growth in online media representation, what is reality anymore? The very fact that these obscure people Morris interviewed now have hundreds of posts and observations about things they did 27 years ago….excuse me while my head explodes. Maybe I should try and be like them. I’ll sit around and wait while everyone else gets the latest media upgrades, new wifipods and the ability to have a three way conversation about going to the park on a sunny day. (That was the upbeat ending of EPIC 2015!? We’ve come soooo far.) Therefore, in a few years I’ll be in the middle of my own figurative swamp and I’ll be saying “You can’t trust the wiki. Everyone thinks the wiki has all the facts, but it don’t. I know, I just wiki’d it.”

is definitely my favorite movie so far in the entire course. While the citizens of this town may be peculiar to the majority, I found myself connecting on an equally strange level. I laughed at many of the early scenes. It wasn’t a mocking laugh, but rather a realization that we all look a little strange when we do the things that make us happy or make sense to us. The man who talks about the mule in his pond has a fascination with animals that reminds me of when I was a child, and his makeshift cages allow him that same sense of amateur biology as a kid with a magnifying glass standing over a pile of ants. I can’t really dislike him for holding the possum by the tail, because he simply doesn’t know any better.

There is seemingly a contradiction with the Turkey hunter discussing how smart and beautiful the turkey is. The immediate question to ask is “Then why are you killing them?” But Morris lets it go, and as we see more of the hunter, we see that it’s too late for him to get a new hobby, a new lifestyle.

Kurt Vonnegut said “Life is no way to treat an animal.” As much as I like that quote, I think it’s equally applicable to humans.

I’m very excited to be jumping into this Errol Morris unit. Especially since we will be dealing with such a large part of his filmography. For one thing he does not verbally impose on his subjects. In a world where documentaries are often platforms for the filmmakers to persuade their viewers (In the fashion of well known Michael Moore and Morgan Spurlock), it’s nice to see a much subtler sort of storytelling at play. Of course Morris does intentionally tune the footage and pushes it in whichever direction he wishes, but when it’s only his subjects talking, you don’t think as much about his intent. I rewatched his two oscar films on youtube. One was from 2002, the other from last month these are the only times I’ve heard him speak. He sounded like nothing I expected.

If you want to see the political ads that Dr. Campbell mentioned, go to http://www.errolmorris.com/content/election04/main.html

When talking about new movies, my dad often tread a routine that’s more tired than “Who’s On First?”

Dad: The paper said (insert movie title here) was (insert judgement: good/bad/delicious/etc.)

Me: Who wrote the review?

Dad: I don’t know.

And that’s about the point where I drop out of the conversation. because taking advice from an unknown random critic is very different than finding a critic who matches your sensibility and taste. Your local newspaper reviewer is not infallible.* Critic’s reviews aren’t the enemy, they’re a tool. When I’m thinking of seeing something I usually read Roger Ebert’s review (Even when I don’t agree with him I often understand an respect the points he makes, and his dry sense of humor really clicks with me. I also check out the fanboysite Joblo.com to see what they say about it, and if I feel like being challenged I’ll check out a David Denby or Anthony Lane review (but I often find their reviews to be contrarian for the sake of prolonging their elite status).

I have a friend that watches everything that comes to the theatres, and when talking to him about his latest venture to see something like Epic Movie, I look at him and say “Why waste your free time on that?” This is especially frustrating when he complains about how much he hated something that was obviously rushed through production to make a quick buck. What did he expect? So I guess I side with Dr. Campbell. Life is too short to be watching uninteresting movies, especially when there are so many older gems that remain undiscovered by the majority. A little guidance from someone that has your same taste can be a blessing.

*Speaking of infallible reviewers, I once read somewhere that Pope John Paul II’s favorite film was Strictly Ballroom. Divine!

I noted how the Armstrong version portrayed Laurie as a male equivalent of Jo moreso than the Cukor/Selznick or Leroy versions. The ‘33 adaptation manages to emasculate Laurie and treat him like a goofball, convincing the audience that the two are in no way compatible. The ‘49 version gives Laurie a sense of dignity back, but he seems so much more refined that he becomes way out of Jo’s league, socially speaking.

In the ‘94 version, Jo actually refrains from calling him Laurie, and instead refers to him as “Teddy” just as affectionate but with a more masculine touch. He holds his tongue more often rather than just babbling (unlike ‘33 Laurie). Furthermore, when Meg attends the ball and Laurie jokes with her, we see a dynamic very close to Meg/Jo with Laurie in Jo’s place. He is scolded for being too informal while Meg attempts to keep up a stately demeanor. We also see key scenes in  his relationship with Jo such as the ice skating and saving Amy. And when Jo cut’s her hair, she attains a physical resembelence with Laurie, who rarely has his locks cut above his ears. These changes put the character on a more equal playing field, making his attraction to Jo a much larger issue and adding more internal conflict to her character.