I think this film is very well done. It really demonstrates how much advertising has an impact on society and how it is everywhere we go. It is a major part of our culture. I like how Morgan was able to incorporate satire on a very important issue on America. I think everyone knows that advertising and marketing are big industries in this country and surround us everywhere we go, but I never realized how bad it is because some of the advertising is so subliminal. This film does a great job of showing how common advertising is in our every day lives.

I thought this documentary did a good job in revealing just how much advertisements can influence movies. When I watched movies growing up I never associated  a familiar product with marketing. I just figured that it was put in there by choice rather than to sell something. What I found astounding was how some brands even had their product affect some of the dialogue in a movie.  I feel that advertising in this way is kind of annoying and more subliminal in getting people to buy their products. Although I understand that many films, especially block busters, need these advertisers in order to achieve a budget of high magnitude, I feel that it is not right to get in the way of the director’s artistic process.

I thought that, from what we have seen, this film is very well done. It was actually kind of alarming to see just how prevalent advertising is everywhere. Something that stuck with me was when Morgan said that people are an advertisement, then went on to talk about people’s brands and what that meant. There really is no escape from advertising, at least in the United States. It was very enlightening to see Sao Paulo. There were absolutely no advertisements on buildings, cabs, street signs, or anywhere. Compared to what it is like in Manhattan, Sao Paulo looks empty.

Also, this isn’t really relevant, but in the film when Morgan was talking to his lawyer, in the background behind the lawyer, there was a film poster for the film The Celluloid Closet. I only mention that because we had seen that in class. It doesn’t really relate to anything, I just thought it was an interesting observation.

Astounding. I really thought the documentary intrigued the audience (in an odd way) in the beginning. It was a compelling topic that needs to be addressed in this country. For me, the worst thing I saw was the statistic: 20% of undergraduate females are sexually assaulted. That’s not okay. And the fact that institutions refuse to collect and report these incidences in their annual reports to ensure a positive reputation is disgusting. What’s worse is these women go to counselors that refute their claims, change the subject, and figure out what SHE did wrong. I heard things like, “Maybe he was stressed” and “What did you do to provoke it? What were you wearing?” How can these institutions allow this to happen?! The narrative structure of the documentary was pretty basic; but was great in filling up time with personal interviews that all connected to the horrible instances of sexual assault and rape on campus. I just hope something is done about this, and soon.

Recently, we’ve been watching quite a few documentaries (and I think that we are continuing to watch documentaries for the rest of the semester), but I wanted to call to attention a film form that is not often used, but can still be incredibly brilliant: the mockumentary. Mockumentaries are films that follow fictional events and characters, but are stylized to parody documentary films (with interviews, b-roll, etc), and even though they are fairly uncommon, it is developing film form that could become extremely popular in the future.

This past weekend, a few friends and I watched What We Do in the Shadows, a 2014 mockumentary that follows a house of vampires trying to fit into the modern world. It was a hilarious film, and I don’t want to give away too much about the plot, but it was funny comparing this film to some of the documentaries that we have seen in class (WARNING: If you do plan on watching it, be warned that some scenes can be pretty graphic. These aren’t Twilight vampires). Because this was meant to be a parody, the creators had a little more fun with the gags and took the film’s subject a bit less seriously, but there were still interesting questions raised, like how involved should the filmmakers be in the “plot” of a documentary. In this film, the camera crew is often directly addressed by the characters, to the point where they become characters in the film themselves (they even run away from the werewolves like the vampires do). Obviously, they’re fictional characters, so they don’t exactly follow the same rules as people do in the real world, but at the same time, if the focus of the film is on particular subjects, should the filmmakers be included? Which is more realistic?

Because of their humorous nature, I feel like mockumentaries have greater capabilities than documentaries do in a sense. They aren’t bound to the “truth” like documentaries are, but they are still capable of tackling real world issues or problems, but addressing them in a creative, indirect way. Even though What We Do in the Shadows doesn’t take itself too seriously, it still addresses issues of isolation, guilt, lost love, and escaping your past. A documentary can do the same thing, yes, but with a fictional plot, sometimes its easier to discuss controversial topics.

The Hunting Ground was an amazing film on multiple levels, but I thought that it had the best use of info graphics out of any documentary that we’ve seen this year (in all honesty, probably better than most documentary films that I have seen recently). I thought that they were not only visually beautiful, but they could be both funny and heart-wrenching at the same time.

The scene that really stood out in my mind was the “Commercial Scene,” where a narrator discussed different college’s punishments for sexual assaults (including having to write a paper to discuss your feelings about the situation). Instead of just showing these facts listed against a black screen however, they showed the different college seals and actually animated them to change from a positive to a disappointing negative when the narrator discussed how foolish the punishments actually were. I thought that this was incredibly well-animated and was much more effective than simply reading the facts, because, in addition the narrator’s sarcastic tone, we, as an audience, visually saw that the colleges were disappointing, and were not properly addressing the issue of sexual assault. Not all graphics work well, but I feel like these not only fit the tone of the film, but added a huge amount of depth to it.

Yesterday I took the shuttle to Target and the driver opened up to me about his frustration working with the Administration at Lafayette. He elaborated on how the college tracks the shuttles and scolds them for being even a minute late when they do not always afford the drivers enough time to get to stops due to traffic. He also mentioned to me how the driver’s were not allowed to use the restroom because this would further delay the schedule. The bus company had to speak up for these simple human rights for their workers to our administration. It reminded me uncomfortably of The Hunting Ground. The hierarchy of people in the college system seems ever more clear. In The Hunting Ground, Dick highlighted how the rights of athlete students as well as fraternity members are held to a higher prestige than regular female students. In the same way, (presumably) the comfort and connivence of the students are held at a higher level than that of the workers, like this bus driver. It seems ridiculous that bathroom breaks haven’t built in for drivers that have to drive for 5+ hours. It also feels very contradictory from the goals and values of a liberal arts college.

It was recently revealed that the new Avengers film will be released as an extended edition on DVD, presumably with the original cut listed at a running time of about 3 hours. This brings into question the idea of a film ever really being complete and the idea of director’s cuts/extended editions in general. There are famous examples of these, such as the Lord of the Rings Extended Editions, Blade Runner: Final Cut, Apocalypse Now Redux, among many others. When is a film truly a complete film? Can the director edit a film as many times as he/she wishes and consider it to still be the same piece of work? Take, for example, the Star Wars special editions. Many fans consider the special editions to not even be “Star Wars,” as many scenes are completely changed or altered. It’s a complex question and one that most likely doesn’t have an answer – more of an opinion.

Before the screening of The Hunting Ground, I thought  The Ninth Girl was such powerful short film. One of the best parts of the film was knowing that is was a short film, I did not know when it was going to end and what cliffhangers it was going to leave for the audience. Another aspect I really loved about the film was the choice to have no dialogue in the film and have the ongoing sound of a heartbeat. Therefore, throughout the film I didn’t know what was going to happen next and due to the intensity of the scene, I felt my heart beating fast like the sound playing. Although a fictional short, it could very might as well be a true story to someone, which is the reason why such a short film like this is so powerful in meaning.