MA Seminar

Adaptation: cross-cultural and cross-media encounters semester 3

MA seminar winter 2018

  1. Writing schedule:

End of February – Introduction, chapter 1

End of March – Chapter 2

End of April – Chapter 3

End of May – whole work corrected and revised, Conclusions

June – exam preparation

Mid June – exam part 1

Mid September – exam part 1

Reviewers for consideration: dr Cieślak, dr Ojrzyńska, dr Lachman, dr Spyra, dr Mirowska

  1. Other tasks:
  • By the end of March, please prepare and email me a list of 15 broad questions for your MA exam for consideration from 3 semesters. You can work in pairs
  • ALWAYS read each others’ works in pairs before sending them to me
  1. The whole semester is consultation-based unless I email you all to come and see me in the class
  2. Consultations:

Tuesdays 11.30-15 room 4.15

Thursdays 13-15 room 4.15

Good luck!

Adaptation: cross-cultural and cross-media encounters semester 2

Class: Friday 13.30-15 room 2.07

Office hours: Thursday 12.30-13.30 and Friday 15-16 room 4.15 

Assessment:

  1. MA thesis outline, Introductory chapter, Ch. 1 – fragments – 50% (please note that handing in your work late will affect your grade)
  2. Participation in class discussions (taking part in discussions, coming to the lesson prepared with questions related to articles/films, homework preparation) – 50%  (please note that more than two absences can lower your grade)
  3. All written work should be handed in by 29 January.

Semester 2

Week 1 Introduction

Week 2 no class (Rector’s Day)

Homework: 1) read pp. 9-24 from Anat Zanger’s Film Remakes as Ritual and Disguise (electronic, library); 2) re-watch Psycho 2x

Week 3 In Search of Kim Novak (1964) – screening and discussion

Mise-en-scene exercises, Film Remake by Constantine Verevis – discussion; Psycho 2x – discussion; Zanger – discussion

Week 4 no class (Experiment conference)

Homework: 1) watch Blade Runner 2x; 2) read “Introduction” from Jess-Cooke’s Film Sequels (2009) (electronic, library)

Week 5 Blade Runner – discussion

On the Edge of Blade Runner by Mark Kermode here

Week 6 Blade Runner – discussion

Christopher Nolan talks Blade Runner versions

Homework: 1) watch Solaris 2x

Week 7 Solaris – discussion

Lem on adaptation 1 here and  here

adaptation 2 here and here

Read: 1) Michael Valdez Moses’s “Solaris, Cinema, and Simulacra”  both from [Edited_by_R._Barton_Palmer_and_Steven_M._Sanders, 2) Constantine Verevis’s Ch. 9 “Second Chance: remaking Solaris” from Fear, Cultural Anxiety and Transformation (2009) (electronic, library)

Week 8 Solaris – discussion

Week 9 Outlines – discussion 1

Week 10  Outlines – discussion 2

Homework: 1) watch Blow-up (1966), 2) Blow-out; 3) Conversation, 4) read http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft1j49n6d3&chunk.id=d0e4989&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d0e4989&brand=ucpress

Week 11 De Palma in conversation

Homework: 1) Tradition and Cinematic Allusion by Vivien Sobchack available in an electronic version in our library

2) read Carroll’s “The Future of Allusion” here

Week 12 De Palma in conversation

Week 13 Outlines, Introductions: discussion

Week 14 Outlines, Introductions: discussion

__________

Week 1 Introduction

Week 2 Vertigo

Homework: 1) read Laura Mulvey’s Visual Pleasure ; 2) Ch. 13 William Rothman, “Vertigo: the unknown woman in Hitchcock” (copy); 3) read an article of your choice on Vertigo from the library

Week 3 Vertigo

Homework: 1) Krzysztof Loska’s frag. on Vertigo (copy); 2) Style and themes in Alfred Hitchcock’s films (copy); 3) frag. of Hitchcock by Truffaut (copy)

Week 4 Vertigo

Mulvey – handout

Homework: 1)read Anthony Shaffer’s play Sleuth; 2) watch Mankiewicz’s film Sleuth 1972

Week 5 Sleuth

Homework: 1) watch Kenneth Branagh’s 2007 Sleuth; 2) group work: compare the text to the film

Week 6 Sleuth

comment: ‘For instance, as if responding to feminist film theory’s distinction between narrative and spectacle, and their definition of woman in the cinema as a ‘spectacle, to be looked at’, Foucault once famously remarked: ‘our society is not one of the spectacle but of surveillance … We are neither in an amphitheatre, nor on the stage, but in the panoptic machine, invested by its effects of power, which we bring to ourselves, since we are part of its mechanism’ (Foucault 1979: 217).’

Homework: 1) read “Twice-Told Tales” by Thomas Leitch available as an electronic article in the library

Week 7 Sleuth

Week 8 Sleuth; Macbeth in adaptation

Week 9 Macbeth in adaptation

Homework: Read/watch reviews/interviews of Macbeth and find one positive and one negative aspect that is mentioned by reviewers/creators of the film about this adaptation. Argue for/against in the class

Week 10 Macbeth in adaptation 2

mid-term analytical note due

Week 11 screening fragments of Zizek’s Pervert’s Guide to Cinema

Homework: watch Jean-Luc Godard’s Breathless and Jim McBride’s Breathless

Week 12 Breathless 1 & 2

Homework: 1) find an article/essay on Breathless 1&2 and respond to it critically; 2) read pp. 164-170 from Constantine Verevis’s Film Remakes (available as an electronic book in our library)

Week 13 Breathless 1 & 2

Week 14 summary; final essays due!

Film Analysis

A few questions worth looking at before you get going:

  • Who is the writer of the film? Has the screenplay been adapted from another work? (adaptation)
  • Who is the director? (auteur studies)
  • Who produced it? (independent or Hollywood, ideology)
  • Who’s the target audience?
  • What do promotional materials say about the film?
  • Is the film part of any larger movement?
  • When was the film made? (historical/political/cultural perspective)
  • What genre/s is it? (iconography)
  • How important is casting? (star studies)
  • Formal qualities: mise-en-scene, soundtrack, colour, narrative, narration, lighting key (look for patterns, repetitions, recurring motifs, linear story, chronological order, open-ended, ambiguity, omniscient narration vs restricted narration)
  • Which scenes are crucial for your analysis and support your argument? Exposition? Climax?

Possible topics to be narrowed down to some specific titles/areas

  • How are remakes/adaptation constructed to cater to digital audiences?
  • Do they invite repeat viewings and collectability?
  • How do these texts accommodate for newcomers and the ones in the know?
  • How do they facilitate recall?
  • How do paratexts respond to this complex situation?
  • How are the adaptations/remakes promoted? Is their status foregrounded or downplayed? Do DVD releases of adaptations/remakes address repetition dilemmas in their bonus features ?
  • How do these texts acknowledge the spirit of cultural exchange in light of the fact that the ‘original’ is known and respected? Are there any textual strategies offering audience pleasure in recognition, remembrance and change?
  • How does the audience respond to films online and how do their responses compare to those of the professional critic?
  • How much space do paratexts devote to remake/adaptation issue?
  • Is there a need for gate-keepers? Should we redefine “amateur”? Compare two reviews
  • Cult of the amateur or cult of participation? Discuss

Please contact me if you require more assistance.

Week 1 (7.10) Introduction: Adaptation – some theoretical issues, key definitions, terms and aspects.

Q: What is adaptation?

Handout 1

Homework: read 1) Introduction and epilogue l hutcheon from Linda Hutcheon’s Theory of Adaptation; 2) Introduction from Henry Jenkins’s Convergence Culture ; 3) Introduction from Chuck Tryon’s Reinventing Cinema

Week 2 (14.10) Adaptation 2: some theoretical issues; key definitions, terms and aspects

digital era, cinema of interactions, hybrid film, interactive spectator, networked movie audience, collective intelligence, Web 2.0, gate-keepers, taste-makers, movie-geeks, convergence culture, participatory culture.

CASE STUDY 1: Lucas in Love

Q: What is cinema today?

Handout 2

Homework: 1) watch FRAGMENTS of Star Wars Uncut; 2) read Introduction from Andrew Keen’s Cult of the Amateur andrew_keen_the_cult_of_the_amateur_how_todaysbookfi-org; 3) find and analyse a movie mashup; 4) read Tryon’s Chapter “Hollywood Remixed” from Reinventing Cinema

Week 3 (21.10) E-FILMS: analysing movie mashups, web shorts, film parodies as adaptations

Q: Is there a need for gate-keepers? Should we redefine “amateur”?

Q: Cult of the amateur or cult of participation?

CASE STUDY 2: Star Wars Uncut

Homework: 1) read Chapter 1 from Reinventing Cinema; 2) Chapter 5 from Reinventing Cinema; 3) find and compare a review of the same film by a professional and non-professional

Week 4 (28.10) E-FILMS: analysing movie mashups, web shorts, film parodies, swedes as adaptations; Web 2.0 and the changing landscape of cultural production and reception: 1990s, DVDs; film blogging; online debate/reviewing; gate-keepers vs movie-geeks.

“sweding”

Week 5 (4.11) E-FILMS part 2: analysing movie mashups, web shorts, film parodies, swedes as adaptations; Web 2.0 and the changing landscape of cultural production and reception: 1990s, DVDs; film blogging; online debate/reviewing; gate-keepers vs movie-geeks.

Week 6 (18.11) Different faces of adaptation: updates, remakes, cross-cultural encounters: analysing movie posters, trailers, DVD extras, user comment

Q: How are these films constructed to cater to new audiences? Do they invite repeat viewings and collectability? How do these texts accommodate for newcomers and the ones in the know? How do they facilitate recall?

Q: How do paratexts respond to this complex situation? How are the adaptations/remakes promoted? Is their status foregrounded or downplayed? Do DVD releases of adaptations/remakes address repetition dilemmas in their bonus features ?

Q: How do these texts acknowledge the spirit of cultural exchange in light of the fact that the ‘original’ is known and respected? Are there any textual strategies offering audience pleasure in recognition, remembrance and change?

Q: How does the audience respond to it online and how do their responses compare to those of the professional critic?

Q: How much space do paratexts devote to “remake” issue?

Q: A no-win situation?

Q: How does the audience respond to this complex situation considering their growing media acumen and the rise of the figure of the online movie geek?

Homework: 1) watch  Stepford Wives (dir. Bryan Forbes, 1975) and Stepford Wives (2004); 2) read ‘Misogynist plot’ by Kermode, Mark,  New Statesman. 8/2/2004, Vol. 133 Issue 4699, p. 34 (electronic library); check out this MA thesis on the two films here

Week 7 (25.11) CASE STUDY 3 adapting gender wars on the basis of Stepford Wives then (dir. Bryan Forbes, 1975) and now (dir. Frank Oz, 2004)

Homework: 1) read Kathryn Schweishelm, ‘Remaking Stepford Wives, Remodelling Feminism’ in Film Remakes, Adaptations and Fan Productions, ed. by Kathleen Loock and Constantine Verevis (in the library or googlebooks – one page is missing); 2) watch fragments Living Dolls  and Love Me, Love my Doll on youtube; 3) A Scientology “Stepford Wife” named “Kate”?

Week 8 (2.12) CASE STUDY 3 adapting gender wars on the basis of Stepford Wives then (dir. Bryan Forbes, 1975) and now (dir. Frank Oz, 2004)

Homework: 1) read fragments from lamb_wally_the_hour_i_first_believedbookfi

pp. 3-6; 148-189; 2)read Nancy Gibbs and Timothy Roche’s ‘The Columbine Tapes’, Time, Monday, Dec. 20, 1999

Week 9 (9.12) watch at home Bowling for Columbine here (dir. Michael Moore, 2002)

Week 10 (16.12) watching Elephant (Gus Van Sant, 2002)

Week 11 (13.1) CASE STUDY 4 revisiting Columbine on film and novel; film analysis workshop

Week 12 (19.1) CASE STUDY 4 revisiting Columbine on film and novel

Week 13 (20.1) The US vs UK Office: comparison

Week 14 (tba) one to one discussions of your analytical notes

Reading list

Bolter, Jay, David and Richard Grusin. Remediation. Understanding New Media. MIT, 2000.

Gray, Jonathan. Show Sold Separately. Promos, Spoilers, and Other Media Paratexts. New York, London: New York University Press, 2010.

Grusin, Richard. “DVDs, Video Games, and The Cinema of Interactions.” Ilha Do Desterro 51 (Jul./dez. 2006): 69-91.

French, Emma. Selling Shakespeare to Hollywood. University of Hertfordshire Press, 2006.

Horton, Andrew, and Stuart Y. McDougal, eds. Play It Again, Sam: Retakes on Remakes. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998. http://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft1j49n6d3&chunk.id=d0e11732&toc.depth=1&toc.id=d0e10285&brand=ucpress

Hutcheon, Linda. A Theory of Adaptation. New York and London: Routledge, 2006 and 2012.

Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York and London: New York University Press, 2006.

____________. Textual Poachers. New York and London: Routledge, 1992.

____________. Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture. MIT, 2009.

Jess-Cooke, Carolyne and Constantine Verevis. Second Takes, Critical Approaches to the Film Sequel. State University of New York Press, 2010.

____________. Film Sequels. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009.

Keen, Andrew. The Cult of the Amateur. New York, London: Double Currency, 2007.

Klinger, Barbara. Beyond the Mutliplex Cinema. Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 2006.

Tryon, Chuck. Reinventing Cinema: Movies in the Age of Media Convergence. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2009.

Verevis, Constantine. Film Remakes. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.

http://henryjenkins.org/2006/09/how_to_watch_a_fanvid.html