The Thin Blue Line (Morris, 1988)

The Thin Blue Line is unlike anything else you'll watch in Critical Approach to Cinema. As the sole documentary this summer, it's also an artistic spin on the otherwise familiar genre. It takes chances, and director Errol Morris makes some really bizarre creative decisions in crafting his argument. What made it similar to other documentaries you have seen? What makes it different?

This documentary single-handedly helped shape the fate of Randall Dale Adams. It brought to light several questionable elements in the trial, including five counts of perjury by supposedly reliable testimonies. In the movie's aftermath, a reexamination of the evidence against Adams was conducted, and the courts finally released him after twelve years of imprisonment.

The Thin Blue Line has a lot of components which makes it very hard to follow for casual viewers. The director made the strange choice not to include names with each of the interviewees, so when the witnesses gave testimonials about certain people, it was harder to mentally relate the names with the faces we saw. How long did it take you to figure out who was Harris and who was Adams?

Errol Morris is a prolific documentarian, and has had a successful career digging out human interest stories and making them relatable to the public. He led the charge in non-fiction films during the 1980's, gaining critical acclaim and awards. When his first two films failed financially, he worked as a private detective for six years, using the skills he learned on that job to create incredibly detailed films like The Thin Blue Line.

Errol Morris directs the documentary almost like a crime thriller, with several reenactments of the murder and a multitude of strange characters with hidden agendas. He also adds a bit of art flair to the picture by including images like the over-popped popcorn, the dangling clock, and the flying milkshake. What do you think of his directing style?

David Ray Harris, the villain of the story, is a fascinating character both on and off the screen. Several people who have taken this class relate him to Hannibal Lecter, because like the cannibalistic serial killer, Harris has a sort of elegance that makes people believe him. In Harris' case, it's a farm boy innocence. Adams, on the other hand, is very annoying to listen and relate to. This increases the shock audience members receive when Harris is exposed as the actual murderer.  What did you think of Harris and how he compares to Adams?

Morris' final talk with Harris, the tape recorder sequence, was actually not supposed to happen. The camera broke the day of filming the interview, so Morris improvised by recording the conversation on a tape recorder. This creates an accidentally eerier effect, but some people have their reservations about it. What did you think about this ending sequence?

The Thin Blue Line is one of those documentaries that you have to see at least once in your life. It packs a powerful message about exposing the truth. A man spent twelve years in prison for a crime he didn't commit. In a way, this is more haunting than anything else we watch in this class. What would your reaction be to this movie if you were involved with the real-life case?

Ali: Fear Eats the Soul (Fassbinder, 1974)

Ali: Fear Eats the Soul was made in two weeks - an experiment for prolific filmmaker Rainer Werner Fassbinder. He made it between two other works: Martha and Effi Briest. However, Fear Eats the Soul has slowly and surely become Fassbinder's most acclaimed and accessible work. It's rivaled by virtually no other in the New German Cinema movement. How different would this film have been if it were made as a big budget production? What is it about this low-budget, indie filmmaking that proves so resilient?

Rainer Werner Fassbinder remains one of the most important figures in the New German Cinema. He is prolific for several reasons, but one aspect of his career that stands out is how fast he worked. His career only lasted a relatively short fifteen years; but, in that time, he completed forty films, and dozens of other media productions. He was also skilled in acting, writings, composing, designing, editing, and producing... all in addition to directing. Fassbinder's themes usually involved clear distaste for the rich and famous, and this caused deep-rooted problems in his personal life. He was infamous for torturing his friends and family both physically and emotionally... including long-time boyfriend El Hedi ben Salem (who played Ali in this film). While Salem was involved with Fassbinder personally, Brigitte Mira (Emmi) was a staple of the director, appearing in several of the filmmaker's works. The director himself has a cameo in the film as Emmi's son-in-law.

There is much political unrest in Ali, namely dealing with the fact that Fassbinder openly attacks traditional relationships- the main couple is a pair that transcends race and age and fall madly in love with each other. Though they struggle with maintaining their cultural heritages, Ali and Emmi ultimately need each other in order to be happy. Is this something we've moved past in Hollywood? Sure, there are more homosexual couples and less "traditional" families being portrayed in the media- but is this progress as radical as it could (or even should) be?

Look at the way Fassbinder plays with color and frames in this film. I find it fascinating looking at these characters from a distance, and how the director presents that in the production. In fact, one of my favorite shots is the window scene right after Emmi's friends abandon her because of her relationship with Ali. In terms of colors, pay close attention to the yellows and the reds, and what each could mean. In particular, look at the benches when they get lunch (pictured here). This is Mira's best acting in the movie, but it's also important in terms of understanding the whole picture.  How are each of the characters portrayed in the various shots? What changes as the film progresses?

Fear Eats the Soul won numerous accolades in 1974, including a few at the Cannes Film Festival, and Best Actress for Mira. Today, it is considered a cornerstone film in the New German Cinema movement. How did you like it?

Contempt (Godard, 1963)

As many former classmates will tell you, Contempt isn't exactly the most popular film of the class. In fact, many will tell you it's the one movie they didn't like. Whether you appreciate the cultural and cinematic significance of the picture or not, Contempt can be tedious and incredibly boring. However, Professor Ratekin himself says that this was a very normal reaction to the Jean-Luc Godard picture. Why do you think this film is usually so unpopular?

The main reason that Contempt is included in the syllabus remains the fact that it represents an important movement in cinematic history: the French New Wave. This movement came on the heels of World War II, when young people became disillusioned with the rudimentary and repetitive products of Hollywood and French cinema. They wanted to experiment with the way films were made, and heighten the reality of motion pictures by shooting outside and in more realistic scenarios. It also heightened the importance of the director, and some of the most influential artists in the French New Wave include Francois Truffaut, Claude Charbol, Jacque Rivette, and of course, Jean-Luc Godard. Have you seen any other films in this movement?

Godard was a highly regarded yet controversial director in the 1960s and 1970s due to his unique approach to filmmaking that emphasized style over substance. He challenged many conventional methods present in movies at that time, and also popularized the use of references to earlier films through dialogue, frame design, and shot content. His Breathless became the symbol of the French New Wave, which also introduced the use of jump cuts to add to the visual style.

Contempt directly addresses Godard's frustrations with American film studios. Jack Palance (who plays the American producer) deems the symbolic and dream-like nature of Fritz Lang's Odyssey too artsy, and the movie makes it seem that Palance is more concerned with money than actually making a good film. In addition, he also awkwardly flirts with Brigitte Bardot, making viewers feel as though he is sleazy and out of place. What do you think of Godard's feelings on American producers? Do you share his notion that they're all like Jack Palance?

The film repeatedly makes viewers aware that they are watching a film- whether through the vocal opening credits (read by Godard himself), the inappropriate color filter changes, and random musical cues. What else did you notice that was "off"?

Nevertheless, Contempt is longer and excruciatingly drawn out in comparison to most movies today. The apartment scene in particular seemingly goes on forever, despite the effects involved in the sequence. The architecture looks as strained as Paul and Camille's marriage, but its hard not to feel strained yourself watching them fight, make up, and fight yet again. Clocked at 34 minutes, this scene is not for the weak hearted. What was your reaction to the scene? What other scenes stuck out to you?

Brigitte Bardot was one of the biggest movie stars in the world at the time of Contempt's release. The production of the movie was sometimes stalled due to the paparazzi constantly hounding her, much to the annoyance of Jean-Luc Godard. The influential French New Wave director hated making Contempt in every way, much preferring to make smaller movies instead of big-budget flicks like this. He did not even get the actors he wanted - Frank Sinatra and Kim Novak turned down the lead roles.

Contempt is comparative to the Ulysses story the characters seek to make, and those of you familiar with the Greek epic will recognize many similarities. Godard's film also makes fun of the moviemaking business itself, not only as a comment on American cinema, but towards the medium in general. How do you think Contempt's perception of filmmaking compares to the more optimistic tones of Singin' in the Rain? Which do you think is more accurate? Which do you prefer?