Purse (2011) signified that the action sequence is the dominance of action films and what basically defines the genre as it “displays dramatic physical action with dynamism and intensity that marks itself out from other sequences”. Action as genre gives the hype or the thrill feeling like riding a roller coaster as cars are about to crash into something with extreme speed. Therefore it needs the thrill and the speed. As Ronin had portrayed, action sequences include the cars speeding up and bashing towards each other while people are running at every directions. Though what if an action film, with the thrill suspense and even car-related, does not incorporate speed? For instance, Nicolas Winding Refn’s film Drive (2011) can still be considered an action film due to its tropes that includes guns, cars and physical violence whether or not captured in speed or slow-motion. Rian Johnson’s Looper (2012) does not only employ the tropes of action films, it does not really dominate itself with action sequences. Like Drive, Looper had also used art house aesthetics of action sequence that is captured with slow-motion instead of the “need for speed”.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UagyHnJAYTM

Purse, L 2011, Contemporary action cinema, “Chapter 3: The action sequence“, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh, pp. 56-75.

As we’ve watched bottle drama episodes this week, it really blew my mind how creative these construction of space is. There are just lots of ways to get around a little of cash left when crating a TV show, like the Community bottle episode where it took place only within one single location and focusing on dialogue and performances. Similarly, Coherence uses minimal cast in a small space within a house though successfully convey dark tense elements through it’s cinematography and editing. These bottle dramas may be constructed out of limited budget but became innovative in its own way. Belton (1988) explains that the space in Rear Window is “quasi-theatrical in its pro-filmic unity and three-dimensionality and yet also cinematic in the flat, multi-windowned design of the apartment…”. This signifies that bottle episodes resembles a series of clips of movie screens but with an importance to the performance yet also the overall aesthetics and compositions.

Belton, J 1988, MLN Comparative Literature, “The Space of Rear Window”, publish The Johns Hopkins University Press, vol. 103, no. 5, pp. 1121-1138, <http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/stable/2905203>. 

With the use of chiaroscuro lighting, femme fatale, overtly use of sets (an obvious fake but still wonderful and embraced), film noir does have its dark German expressionist influence side. The genre operates in the dark where mystery is the key tropes and viewers almost always see a detective. I did just called it a genre. But is it? House (1986) shared that there are both sides to the argument. Some say it’s not a genre, that it is merely a “specific period of film history” or a film movement. We also prospect that film noir is the mood of film, the style and tone rather than genre. I myself believes film noir to be an adjective of a film, whether in terms of genre, style or movement. Just as we say that The man from U.N.C.L.E (2015) and the film we watched on week 8 screening, The Killers (1946), are film noirs. When we say “film noir”, we think of that mood where smokes are around you and all that jazz is playing. Thus, it can definitely be a genre since genres define and better yet describes what the film is.

We have been reconstructing “vampires” whether inspired contextually as if they are meant to adapt and evolve (or live immortally) throughout the eras. They basically camouflage as humans since they were invented through the classical Victorian era and now contemporary settings. From Dracula (1992) to the classical Interview With a Vampire (1994) to sci-fi inspired Underworld (2009) and the teen culture Twilight (2008), various different elements were played around to mix with the “vampire” genre. Despite the diversity of contexts and elements, we can tropes-out that they are usually wealthy, sunlight intolerant and many other characteristically tropes presents. These films often come back to the idea of love and romanticism in which defines the whole essence of vampire culture. Though, what I have found inspiring is vampire filmmaking that break out of this traditional pattern such in Twilight, where sunlight doesn’t burn but instead shines them. Also in A Girl Who Walks Alone at Night, a contemporary western-tinted vampire film not of the typical english/american origin but rather from Iran.

The idea that they co-exist with humans, even only on films makes me question how genre forms. Like the vampire culture, genres do also evolve and overtime barriers do get blurry. But aren’t we as viewers, audiences and filmmakers causes the change and vice versa? is each new film the one changing us?

As we watched One Night the Moon (2001), my ideologies about musical was a bit challenged considering a typical happy ending, harmonic emotion embodied by the genre. The film musical in the other hand, incorporates a gothic vibe in terms of the use of dangerous Australian landscape as its setting. Let alone an ending that devastates two parents who found their daughter died due to the area’s geography. The reading by Grant (2012) also talks about how only film musicals feature an imaginary space even if it is ostensibly a real location and depicts its space as charmed by the magic of performance. Nevertheless, it does reminded me of the film adaptation Into the Woods (2014) the presents a unique kind of musical in dark fairytale world. I’ve also encountered the difference between film musicals and film that contain lots of musicals. Musical refers to “films that involve the performance of song and/or dance by the characters and also include singing and/or dancing as an important element” (Grant, 2012). Where although a film includes a dominantly music and soundtracks as its subject such as Pitch Perfect (2012 &2015) and The Sapphires (2012), they are not musicals because the characters do not perform for expressing their emotion but rather consciously sing and dance for the purpose of stage performances.

In this week 4 studio we’ve watched the action sci-fi horror, James Cameron’s Aliens (1986). Or what we might call it now is not as “horror” as the contemporary supernatural horror films we see in today’s cinemas. Though, Aliens does incorporate horrific frightening devices such as the dark antagonist “being” and the intense background music that puts the audience’s heightened emotional stress at the edge of their seat. What is interesting about this kind of film are the action heroine, monsters and the portrayal of female power. As Bundtzen (1987) explored, “its depiction of female fecundity, prolific and devouring, is so powerful and fictively generative”. We can see Ripley’s motivational success towards saving the child and to destroy the alien monster that threats the humanity. We can also see the powerful female alien, responsible for more of the alien reproduction and their aim to conquer human home. Both sides are eager to survive and that is the nature of all species whether it is male or female. Aliens shows the idealised motherly figures, such as the alien and Ripley to protect their little ones for the survival of their species. Further depiction of the female sexuality is complemented with visual designs such as the alien form that “resembles female genitalia…” while showing a “graphic display of female anatomy” (Bundtzen, 1987). These designs can be a rather revolting representation of femininity, but its creativity happens to encourage the promoted female power and heroine across action (or other) films as well as our society. 

Here are some thoughts on various heroines as well as strong female antagonists/ characters:

Bundtzen, L. K. 1987, Film Quarterly, “Monstrous Mothers: Medusa, Grendel, and Now Alien”, vol. 40, no. 3, publish University of California Press, pp. 11-17.