Teryn Bivens

Dr. R. Reimer

European Cinema

Summer 2004

Minutes for August 4, 2004 in European Cinema

·        Hand out study sheet for the final exam and went over the expectations and material for the exam.  Important to pay attention to reports and there will be a question on the exam.  Also, make sure to finish Giannetti and how it applies to what we are doing for the final exam.

·        Only four reports today.

·        Recommend excellent movie of Elephant by Gus VanZant

·        Make sure to make objective analysis of presentations to show weak and/ or strong points and any comments on the presentations.

·        (Ella) Le Chevre by Francis Veber in 1982 and Pure Luck by Nadia Tass in 1992 – French film then Hollywood remake.  Main differences were 1) characterization of a French film and then the remake as a Hollywood film.  Comedy.  Hollywood more of a slapstick comedy (silly and practical jokes) and not French Farce (a whole bunch of random things put together that don’t necessarily make sense).  Business man’s daughter gets lost on vacation and another guy with bad luck will find the girl because their paths will cross.  His bad luck will lead him to her.  He was switched as a baby, sliding doors don’t open for him, allergic to bee stings, etc.  Four Main Alterations that include the title, music, filming technique, and casting.  Le Chevre= The Goat (bait for wolves) similar to our expression “knock on wood”.  Pure Luck= Conclusion is drawn more quickly.  The Music= French beginning= Clip #1= constantly blissful music, and pay attention to the absence of music after the opening scene- leaves conclusions more open whereas the Hollywood beginning=Clip #2 jumps between hectic and peaceful, non-diegetic music remains throughout the movie, to CLUE US IN more quickly.  FILM TECHNIQUE- French beginning spends a lot of time on one take (less formalistic) and Hollywood beginning spends -little time on one take (formalistic).  CASTING= French duo meant-to-be Clip #1- Pierre Richard famous in France for his comedy and Gerards Depardieu is more serious French actor and then became famous for acting together and this was the first time that they acted together.  and the Hollywood’s Star in Clip #2- Martin Short and Danny Glover… Glover and Short?… No… Glover and GIBSON (like in Lethal Weapon later on).  Hollywood exaggerates the film in it’s ending especially… with them finally finding Valerie and then they are going to fall off the waterfall.  French ending is much more subtle and the Hollywood ending is much more exaggerated and clued you in a lot more and added dialogue actually saying “You found her, you found her.”

·        (Caitlin) Scarlet Letter written by Nathaniel Hawthorne and was born in Massachusetts.  Takes place in colonies and there existed no line between church and state.  There have been about ten versions of the Scarlet Letter.  German version by Wim Wender’s and the 1995 Hollywood version directed by Joffe with Demi Moore.  More dark colors, more isolated environment with no horse drawn carriages in the German version whereas the Hollywood version has more of a defiant personality by clearly going against what the man told her and the atmosphere was similar with the colors yet Salem was more alive and had more of a vitality with kids playing and horse drawn carriages.  The major difference is the timeline… the German just shows the consequences of action as Wender’s is a known existentialist and the Hollywood shows love, sex, and action and shows the whole relationship develop.  Wenders was born in post war Germany and represents the oppressed and the oppressor.  Talks about the poison mushroom comparison to the Jews during Nazi rule in Germany.  Color symbolism in the Hollywood version and there are physical barriers and not only the oppression as seen in the clip by swords in between the two characters.  The light is shining on the baby, the colony flag is in the background as a reminder and there are arms in the front.  A lot more stylistic and in composition rather than in dialogue as in German version.  There is a dramatic action packed movie that ends up with happy ending and incorporates more dramatic scenes such as witch trials and included it all to have war scenes to make more interesting.  Wender’s says that this was his worst experience in movie and says that it wasn’t from his heart and that it was pretentious and preposterous and needed to be from him.  Had small budget, wrong location, and wrong cast that he had wanted.

·        ( ) The Vanishing in 1988 by Dutch Psychological thriller and in 1993 by same director Sluizer.  Girl was kidnapped and based on the novel the Golden Egg.  First major difference in the absence of the Golden Egg in the Hollywood version.  Dutch version Rex agrees to take a poison in order to understand what Saskia has gone through.  Find out that the killer and sociopath is claustrophobic and buries the people alive so that they can experience his ultimate worst fear.  Thriller, Mystery, and Action all in the Hollywood version and the new girlfriend helps kill the killer and sociopath and then there is a happy ever after ending with the boyfriend and the new girlfriend.  Hollywood version tells same story and encompasses several genres and gives audience expected ending.

·        Jean Renoir 1932 French film of Boudi Saved from Drowning and Paul Mazursky 1986 Hollywood remake called Down and Out in Beverly Hills based on play by Rene Fauchois Boudo Sauve des Paux  and popular play in 1930’s.  A tramp is depressed after losing his companion (dog) and decides to commit suicide and the rescuer’s life is completely changed.  Both films reflect the attitude of society in their time, location, and their decade, and the two main characters (tramps) in these films embody the differences.  The hero of Renoir’s film is vagabond and a product of the natural world and never been a member of any group and uneducated rambler and wanderer.  He doesn’t know what direction he is going to take or when and he just knows that he goes when he wants, where he wants.  What you see is what you get with Boudo.  Takes us to natural habitat of the river and the river is slow moving and free flowing.  In 1930’s France there is a depression going on with a lot of suffering.  This film was an affirmation of what was going on in France at the specific time.  Jean Renoir wrote articles for a Communist newspaper during this time.  He puts this vagabond into apartment and frames the action in the home showing the free spirited Boudu confined by the walls and the closeness of the inhabitants of the home.  The clash of the lifestyles of the very regimented ritualistic mannerisms is the basis of the comedy of the film.  The attempt to corral the Boudo in the new lifestyle and the paradoxical instructions given that make absolutely no sense to him.  The Hollywood version of the Tramp, Jerry, spends time talking to dog Kerouac and isn’t the kind of person that started out as a radical but that has just been on a downward spiral and found himself in the alleys of Beverly Hills with his dog going down and searching the best garbage.  Jerry gets upset when dog leaves him and ends up drinking and stumbles in yard of mansion, stuffs his pockets with rocks and jumps in pool.  They save Jerry even though he isn’t appreciative and that can change and become what people want him to be and what they need him to be.  Jerry isn’t a loner or free spirit but a product of society and a well-educated man.  He becomes a friend to Dave (the owner of the mansion).  Jerry makes a place for himself in this Beverly Hills mansion.  Dave is totally taken in by Jerry.  1980’s America is Me generation of how much can we earn and how much can we spend and takes place in between Thanksgiving and Christmas that is the peak of consumerism.  Mazursky gives the character of Jerry something that is lost through circumstance to become a bum where Renoir was a natural sort of person and learned how to behave in society but wasn’t very successful at it.  Boudo rids himself of money, clothes, and status and sends his hat floating down the river.  In the end both of the protagonist’s end up as tramps once again.

·        (Donnisa) French film The Return of Martin Guerre directed in 1982 by French director Daniel Vigne and the Hollywood version Sommersby directed by Jon Amiel in 1993 which stars Richard Gere and Jodie Foster.  Both movies contain a common issue of spousal abandonment.  Contained idea of identity theft in both films where a young wife/mother is abandoned by her husband and finds herself face to face with an imposter of her husband and tries to figure out if in fact he is her husband.  He knows all of the facts, figures, townspeople and all yet accepts him with just a few doubts.  There is an idea of pretending is not for children and that if we want something bad enough we will have it and believe it.  The differences include that the French version of the film is set in a peasant village in 1542 and has an opening scene of arranged marriage and represents that is not a love match and that the director chose this to represent that there is trouble to come.  The Hollywood version of the film is set in US during the Civil War time period in the 1800’s and opens with the wife of Laurel sowing in the fields which represents the lack of a husband because she is performing manual labor and the director chose this to suggest that trouble has already come.  Throughout the middle of the film there is the differences of the property dispute.  In the French version Martin wants the money that his farm has earned while he was away and his uncle looks for way to disprove Martin’s identity to keep the money and the European version keeps identity/property dispute within the family.  Whereas the Hollywood version expands somewhat shows Jack Sommersby presenting a property dispersal plan to townspeople.  The townspeople would finance the crop then work and own his land and.  This Hollywood version spreads out identity/property issue among many.  The reason for change goes with the idea of bigger is better, there is more at stake and a lot of people are responsible and not just the family and isn’t as centralized.  In the ending of the movies there is a difference of the return of the true husbands.  In the French version the real Martin Guerre returns after battle injury and finds that the imposter is on trial for impersonating him.  His wife is faced with the issue of which person to accept and eventually accepts real husband to avoid persecution.  There is conflict to save her physical life in spite of her emotional health.  In the Hollywood version, the real Jack Sommersby doesn’t ever return.  He dies from a wound sustained during a fight and kills another man.  He is accused of murder for the death of this man by the neighboring town and the imposter is arrested for this murder.  There is a bittersweet conflict that arises: In order to be cleared, he would have to admit to impersonation in which he would lose his family, land, and his respectable name and the daughter would become illegitimate.  If he maintains that he is Jack Sommersby he will be hung for murder that he really didn’t commit.  He would retain his family, land, and his respectable name and the townspeople would retain their land ownership).  The Hollywood style sentiment conflict, tugs at the heartstrings and gives viewers a roller coaster ride of unexpected outcome in which Jack makes the decision between his life and others.  The main differences are the bigger and better themes and the difference in time periods because of what was available.  In the end he does choose to sacrifice himself and will take the rap for the murder he didn’t commit.  Is Hollywood version more morally ambiguous?  Plays into both of the films but was addressed more as a hero/rescue version in the Hollywood version.