Comments for .

Comment on Cut and Wait: Tyler’s Paper by Judges 5:27 at bavatuesdays

Judges 5:27 at bavatuesdays — Sun, 04 May 2008 10:58:58 +0000

[...] yet still provides his own reading of this film as a kind of visual poem about obsession. To quote Tyler’s final paper: This post wouldn’t be complete without mentioning Brad’s blog, and trying to speak to the [...]

Comment on Cut and Wait: Tyler’s Paper by Incorporation Of Small

Incorporation Of Small — Tue, 05 Feb 2008 06:35:05 +0000

A Look at Small Business Incorporating in Florida…

The choice to incorporate a small business in Florida has several advantages….

Comment on dizzy spell by Poetics by Praxis » dizzy spell

Poetics by Praxis » dizzy spell — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:37:46 +0000

[...] Original post by tyler [...]

Comment on the blog also rises by Poetics by Praxis » the blog also rises

Poetics by Praxis » the blog also rises — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:37:17 +0000

[...] Original post by tyler [...]

Comment on dizzy spell by I’m Always Home. I’m Uncool. » Blog Archive » Scotty, Eben, and an Obsession With Women…no, Wait…the Past… no, Wait…

Wed, 09 May 2007 18:10:52 +0000

[...] In his blog, Tyler makes an excellent point, and one that I’ve touched on here: is Judy actually real? I think this confusion is exactly what Hitchcock was going for in the film. Tyler goes back and fourth between believing that Judy is a figment of Scotty’s imagination and her as a real-life, flesh and blood person. I think that this is the exact same confusion that Scotty feels, especially in the scene where Judy finally reprises her role as “Madeline.” Suddenly we are all caught up in the middle of Scotty’s vertigo, and are being spun around, being shown many different forms of the same woman, leaving us wondering just who or what it is Scotty is obsessed with anyway. Beth also comments on certain “realities” simply being inside of Scotty’s mind, only this time in regards to the two scenes where Scotty sees “Madeline” and Judy from their perspective hotel windows. I have thought about it over and over, and have continued to draw a blank as to how to explain the scene where Scotty follows “Madeline” into her hotel, and she is not there. Maybe Beth is right on track with her idea of it all being in Scotty’s head… [...]

Comment on The old innkeeper: the decent human being by Final Blog - Yojimbo » Royale With Cheese

Final Blog - Yojimbo » Royale With Cheese — Mon, 30 Apr 2007 11:32:30 +0000

[...] I believe Tyler and his title-that-says-it-all blog, “The old innkeeper: the decent human being” has got something good here. The old man is the voice of reason, although Sanjuro has his own reasons for doing things and Gonji is always left unheard. But he is the voice of the audience, telling Sanjuro what we would like to tell the wandering samurai. When Sanjuro is brutally beaten by Ushitora’s thugs, he crawls to Gonji’s tavern and the old man hides him and eventually takes him to safety. Through Gonji, we are essentially protecting Sanjuro while he’s in the most vulnerable state he has experienced thus far. We, the audience, want Sanjuro to be alright, since he is the one trying to preserve a better world for Gonji, and essentially all mankind, to live in. Gonji is the most human character in the film, and when he is captured, the entire world of good, reason, and innocence is put into danger. This is why Sanjuro comes back with the fury of millions; he is no longer a ronin wandering around. He had found his cause, even if was only temporary; Sanjuro was battling for the good of the world and his only true friend, Gonji. Gonji represented the world Sanjuro had apparently vowed to protect; and Sanjuro would have gone to the death for that man, because, at that point in time, Gonji was his master. « The Original Invisible Woman | [...]

Comment on dizzy spell by breijo’s rear window ethics

breijo’s rear window ethics — Fri, 27 Apr 2007 21:49:34 +0000

[...] I found Tyler’s initial reaction to “Vertigo” really interesting in this post. Here, he says, “I’m not sure I have a lot to say about it yet. It was certainly very beautiful, certainly very interesting. Very strange. Parts made me shiver a little- but parts of the film are so strange that I can’t quite wrap my mind around them after one viewing. Heck, I’m still not sure what exactly happened. It seems to me that there is a chance that Judy wasn’t real at all.” As soon as I read this, I remembered the class discussion we had when we first launched into “Portrait of Jennie”. Many people in the class weren’t sure how they felt about Jennie-whether or not she was real, a figment of Eben’s imagination, a symbol for the potential to overcome obstacles, a representation of the general soulmate, etc. Even the film was slightly ambiguous. All that Eben had in the end was her scarf, but no more physical evidence aside from that. This is precisely “Vertigo”. Though it is implied that she is a real person; Judy, at least…she rents the hotel. So, physically, the Judy character (though how much of “Judy” is there in “Madeline” and vice versa, we do not know) must exist. But what does Madline/Judy represent? Does she, too, represent the unattainable as Jennie did? Both (Madeline/Judy and Jennie) were had by men who obsessed over them and gave nearly anything to be with them again-they were all happy for a short while, but in the end, all girls disappear. In this post Tyler also says, “Besides, Scottie even sees her as a ghost when he finally gets her hair in that bun.” I’m assuming he means the sequence involving the smoke/mist, the green lighting, and the moment of anticipation, and, as Hitchcock called it, climax. Interestingly enough, Dieterle uses mist which surrounds Jennie when Eben looks at her after finishing her/his portrait (also interestingly enough, Dr. C already told the class that this scene is his view of where the climax of the “Jennie” movie is…hmmm… ). It seems to me that initial reactions to Vertigo were extremely similar to those of “Jennie,” also in terms of plot. Both men are obsessed by something they can only attain for a short time, both women are mysterious about their pasts, both seem to overcome time barriers-Madeline in terms of Carlotta and Jennie in terms of actual time…however she does it. Also, it can be said that both women return from the dead in one way or another. While Jennie is known to have died physically years before Eben and Jennie met, she manages to return as though she had never left. Conversely, Madeline “dies” but returns through Judy, and in that ghostly scene in the hotel room, appears as though she, too, had never left. I found Tyler’s post to be so incredibly similar to my (as well as other classmates’) reactions to “Jennie,” both the text and the film, that just reading the reaction made me notice connections I hadn’t made between the women before. Thanks, Tyler! [...]

Comment on Every man be blind— by B&B » Blog Archive » “And to make an end is to make a beginning.” -T.S. Eliot

Fri, 27 Apr 2007 16:07:53 +0000

[...] Tyler beautifully articulates the question, “Why should we trust Morris” in his post. He says that, “listening to claims of truth [them] sometimes begin to take shape that might be real”. Our “real” then, is changed by the “real” of others. Although we may assume that we live a life unaffected by those around us, we are connected. Also, If Morris carefully chooses shots and only uses ten percent of the footage he shoots, and then he portrays a subjective real. Yet, we believe and I believe. [...]

Comment on a walking shadow; a poor player by Rick’s Cafe Americain » Blog Archive » Final Paper on Gates of Heaven

Fri, 27 Apr 2007 14:29:07 +0000

[...] I talked a very good deal about the first 30 minutes of the film in the first half of my paper so I think I’ll just introduce and attempt to explain the Harberts who are more or less the stars of this film. But before I do I don’t think I can really get by in this paper without talking about the incredible monologue by Ms. Florence Rasmussen that seemingly separates the two main sections of this film. I haven’t gotten a good grasp on this woman’s purpose in the film yet but I guess it doesn’t really hurt to speculate. In Tyler’s blog he praises her scene but gives the impression that it all just seems a little too good to be true. I get the same impression that this scene was almost too perfectly absurd to be truly authentic (especially the sound of the car). But all the same, if this scene were in fact heavily doctored by Morris that would make it all the more important to the film. I have yet to come across a good theory as to her purpose but I kind of see her as a preparation to the next part of the film. The first 30-35 minutes of the film, upon first viewing, seem to be a pretty straight documentary style; they aren’t, but I think that’s the initial impression that audiences get. But then we get to Ms. Rasmussen who starts off by talking about this failed pet cemetery but then goes off topic about her son almost without our notice. This is also the way of the entire film. When we see this rather long monologue for the first time we get the impression that maybe we’re supposed to be looking at this thing a little more closely. And then, Morris comes in with the Harberts which are arguably the most important characters in the film. So, now I’ll begin with them… [...]

Comment on dizzy spell by Robyn’s Blog » Blog Archive » You are what you eat…or rather, what you represent.

Fri, 27 Apr 2007 02:23:45 +0000

[...] Okay, anyway, back to what I’m trying to say. Johnny falls in love with Mr. Elster’s wife, Madeline. Except—and this is the kicker—Johnny never actually meets Elster’s wife Madeline. He falls in love with Judy Barton’s representation of Madeline! He never loves Madeline—he has always loved Judy! But that’s inaccurate, because he’s never met Judy either (until later in the movie). Johnny falls in love with a non-existent person. Tyler suggests in his blog the possibility that Judy doesn’t exist at all, and is a complete construct in Johnny’s head. I think Tyler meant that Judy might literally not exist, but I want to argue that even though Judy is alive as a human being—she ceases to exist when she gives up her identity, because we are all only concept. Madeline-as-represented-by-Judy isn’t real, she’s an idea that Judy and Mr. Elster created to fool Johnny. Johnny loves a complete construct. And not only a construct of Madeline—Johnny falls in love with Judy while she is pretending to be Madeline while pretending that Madeline is possessed by Carlotta. [...]