film short answer

All right, so we're continuing our discussion of film noir, but we're really thinking about it in relation to Laura Mulvey's discussion of the gaze. So I've assigned this piece, "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema," because it is probably the most influential work in critical cinema studies that's been published in an academic context. If you look up "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema," you'll see that it was cited tens of thousands of times since it was first published in the journal Screen in 1975. So it's an older piece, but it's very representative of the ways that ideas in film theory that have a certain theoretical construct around them can sort of make their way into popular discourse. So we're going to think about whether we agree with her take on the gaze and whether it still applies to the ways that film form works today. And we'll also look at some examples of feminist filmmakers from the period that she was writing in who tried to really combat these ideas around the gaze and experiment with what feminist film form could really look like. So when the article had its 30th and 40th anniversaries, there were retrospectives which you can find online if you're interested. There were a lot of articles published in places like The Chronicle of Higher Education, as well as the Screen journal that it was originally published in, as well as in popular media commemorating the impact of "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema." And even now the idea of the gaze has been a part of popular culture and discussions of film. So you can see here, it's been talked about in relation to Magic Mike, in relation to tropes of television. And if you look up male gaze in YouTube, you'll actually see hundreds and hundreds of compilations of clips that are organized around the male gaze, the idea of the male gaze in film. So it's had some staying power. As I mentioned, the article came out in a journal called Screen, which was a really influential journal in the 1970s when film studies as a discipline was really making its way into the Academy, and thinking about ways to unify analysis of film form with some of the more philosophical theoretical ideas that were coming out of critical theory, in particular in Europe. And so Mulvey published her piece in a journal called Screen. And she was very influenced by psychoanalytic theory, which was de rigueur at the time. So if you're a psychoanalytic theorist, you'll have to sort of stay with me, because I think these ideas are a little bit controversial now. And certainly a lot of people have published responses to this article that take issue with many aspects of it, but I still think it's useful, so we'll just move through it. So if you're a psychoanalytic theorist, you take as your starting point that the world is underlined with these deep psychological structures that were studied first by Freud and then revised by Lacan. These structures surface in literature, film, and in art. For example, I'm using the metaphor of the tree here, but you might have the root structure of the tree, which is invisible. We don't see it, but it might actually be bigger than the part of this tree that's above the surface. It's a really important part. And that is essentially your id, where your instincts lie. The tree itself is your ego. That's kind of our reality. And then somewhere in the sky, you have your super-ego, which is morality and ethics. And so scholars who are interested in psychoanalysis and relating it to film wanted to think about how these ideas might impact the viewing experience. And they were also interested, particularly feminist scholars like Laura Mulvey were interested in the ways that these deep structures generate and maintain gender relations and inequities. So for psychoanalytic film theorists, with film, the reason that viewing a movie is so pleasurable for people is that it imitates early childhood socialization. So cinema, for this reason, is both pleasurable and threatening. So it's organized around three looks. You have the look of the camera, which is why we're talking about it in relation to cinematography. You have the audience watching the film. And you have the characters watching each other on screen. So with classical film form, films that are made in a kind of mainstream fashion, essentially you disavow the audience watching the film and the look of the camera. And instead you focus on characters watching each other on screen. Essentially, you want people to forget that they're watching a movie and become completely immersed within the experience of the film, within the fictional world. So this process essentially mirrors two socialization processes, so the mirror phase and the castration complex. Mulvey refers to Lacan. And there are a lot of gender assumptions in this article. So essentially at 18 months, a child who is always a boy child within this framework is fascinated by his own image and realizes the difference between himself and his caregiver, who in this framework is always his mom. So Lacan says that this is overlaid with misrecognition. In other words, we see ourselves in the mirror and we misrecognize our reflection as a superior version of ourselves. So you might think about, OK, how would this compare to film viewing? So you see the protagonist onscreen. And you identify with them. And this is heightened by the editing, so point of view shots, over the shoulder shots, and so on. You want to be this protagonist, but of course you are far inferior. So essentially, there is a connection, according to Mulvey, between this idea of the mirror phase, this very basic fundamental root structure sort of socialization process and the process of watching film. That's why we like it so much. So the second socialization process that film mirrors is the castration complex. So again, this is a framework that's really built around a lot of assumptions around gender. So essentially, the idea is that movies mimic the recognition of sexual difference. So movies are essentially constituted by sexual difference. So men recognize that women are phallusless, according to Freud and Lacan, and therefore the female body is threatening. And because women are essentially the focus of the camera within mainstream film, that presents this idea of the castration complex that is a threat, the threat of female sexuality. But what Mulvey argues is that films actually offer a kind of escape route from this threat. So they do this in a couple of ways. So one is scopophilia, which is pleasure in looking. So you can see this in this sort of classic sequence from the film Psycho directed by Alfred Hitchcock who is very interested in psychoanalysis. You can see themes of psychoanalysis throughout his films. And in this sequence, you get a literal peephole, so pleasure in looking is very literalized in Psycho. So the narrative brings out the threat of female sexuality, tames it through this kind of scopophilia. And the function of the narrative in relation to this pleasure in looking is to control or contain that threat to absolve it. So it does this in two ways, according to Mulvey. It does this through fetishism. So it reduces the woman to pure spectacle. So to fetishize is essentially to reduce a part for the whole, so Marilyn Monroe's breasts, Marlene Dietrich's legs, J. Lo's butt. You can probably think of other examples. And then you have sadistic voyeurism. So here, the woman is punished through a sadistic male gaze and sometimes gain salvation through marriage. So fetishization and sadistic voyeurism are enabled through scopophilia, which occurs in two ways. According to Mulvey's piece, you have active scopophilia, where we identify with the powerful gaze of the camera in order to objectify the woman. And then you have narcissistic scopophilia in which we identify with the character. Filmic form heightens this through cinematography and editing techniques. So I'm going to preview a couple of editing terms here, eyeline match and point of view. So essentially, a long shot establishes the scene where the characters are in scene in relation to one another in the space. And then you cut. And you have a medium close up which shows us who we should identify with. And he's looking into off-screen space. And then the next shot is essentially an eyeline match. It sutures the gaze of the camera to that character. And it answers what he's looking at. So in this case, it's a woman's legs, which Mulvey, via Freud, would call fetishism. Point of view is a related term. So essentially, this describes when a shot is supposed to show us what a character is seeing from their optical point of view as if the camera were their eye. And you can think about this too kind of in a metaphorical sense with the idea of the private eye in film noir. So for example, here we know that the medium shot at the end is from the optical point of view of the person seen looking, as if the camera were essentially his eye. So we saw this working in a slightly different way when we were watching Insecure. So if you'll think back to Insecure, you have this shot. Essentially the camera is over Issa's shoulder. It's not very obvious, but we can see her on the left-hand side of the screen. And then it cuts to a shot of the person whose perspective the gaze is from. In this case, it's from Issa's perspective. And then we see what she's looking at, Eddie lounging by the pool in a long shot. And then we get another medium close up of Issa sort of thinking about how she's going to pursue him. So in that case, gender is switched. So we'll think about that a little bit more in a second. So one of the examples that Mulvey uses is The Blue Angel by von Sternberg. So she's very interested in the tropes of classical Hollywood cinema. So in this clip, think about the way that film form, such as eyeline match and point of view, encourages the viewer to identify with the man who's watching the performance by Marlene Dietrich. You can also think about how lighting and other aspects of mise en scene encourage us to maybe objectify the performer in a particular way. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] [MUSIC PLAYING] - (SINGING) I often stop and wonder why I appease you men, how many times I blunder in love and off again. They offer me devotion. I like it, I confess. When I respect emotion there is no need to guess Falling in love again, never wanted to. What's a girl to do-- can't help it. Love's always been my game, play it how I may. I was made that way-- - [INAUDIBLE] - --can't help-- - [INAUDIBLE] [MUSIC STOPS] - Ladies and gentlemen, it gives me great pleasure to present to you our guest of honor, Dr. [INAUDIBLE],, professor of the local high school. - Pleased to meet you, professor. [APPLAUSE] - [INAUDIBLE] [MUSIC RESUMES] - (SINGING) Falling in love again, never wanted to. What's a girl to do-- can't help it. Love's always been my game, play it how I may. I was made that way, can't help it. Men cluster to me like moths around the flame. and if their wings burn, I know I'm not to Blame. Falling in love again, never wanted to. What's a girl to do? I just can't help it. [APPLAUSE] Falling in love again, never wanted to. What's a girl to do-- can't help it. Love's always been my game, play it how I may. I was made that way, can't help it. Men cluster to me like moths around the flame. And if they're wings burn, I know I'm not to blame. Falling in love again, never wanted to. What's a girl to do-- can't help it. [END PLAYBACK] So this is another example from a film noir. So this is from Gilda, a classic 1946 noir directed by Charles Vidor. So as you watch the clip, think about how film form, such as eyeline match and point of view, encourages the viewer to identify with Johnny, played by Glenn Ford. So pay attention to camera movement, especially when the camera dollies into the medium close up of his face. You can think about how lighting and other aspects of mise en scene encourage us to objectify Gilda within this context. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] - Johnny? - Matthew? Hello, Ballin. - Come on up here. - Well, what are you crying about? - I feel great, Johnny. - You look foolish. - I'll show you why. - Where is the canary? - How did you know? - How did I know what? - So you don't know-- come. This is where the canary is, John. [WOMAN SINGING] What a surprise to hear a woman singing in my house, eh, Johnny? - It's quite a surprise. - Gilda, are you decent? - Me? Sure, I'm decent. - Gilda, This is Johnny Farrell. Johnny, this is Gilda. [MUSIC STOPS] - So this is Johnny Farrell. I've heard a lot about you, Johnny Farrell. - Really? Now, I haven't heard a word about you. [TUTTING] Why, Ballin. - I wanted to keep it as a surprise. - Was it a surprise, Mr. Farrell? - It certainly was. You should've seen his face. - Did you tell him what I'm doing here, Ballin? - No, I wanted to save that as a surprise too. - Hang on to your hat, Mr. Farrell. - Gilda is my wife, Johnny. Mrs. Ballin Mundson, Mr. Farrell. Is that all right? - Congratulations. - Oh, you don't congratulate the bride, Johnny. You congratulate the husband. - Really? Well, what are you supposed to say to the bride? - You wish her good luck. - Good luck - Thank you, Mr. Farrell. My husband tells me you're a great believer in luck. - We make our own luck, Johnny and I. - I'll have to try that sometime. I'll try it right now. Tell him to come to dinner with us tonight, Ballin. - It's an order. Come along, Johnny. We'll let Gilda get dressed. Look your best, my beautiful. This will be the casino's first glimpse of you. - I'll look my very best, Ballin. I want all of the hired help to approve of me. Glad to you that you, Mr. Farrel. - His name is Johnny, Gilda. - Oh, I'm sorry. Johnny is such a hard name to remember and so easy to forget. Johnny, there-- see you later, Mr. Farrel. - That's right, Mrs. Mundson. - I'll see Johnny downstairs. - I'll see him at the casino. [END PLAYBACK] So in this sequence from Out of the Past, which is a film we've seen clips from before, we can think about how the film encourages identification with the protagonist, played by Robert Mitchum, and also the fact that it's taking place across the border. So besides gender, what other dynamics are in play within this scene? [VIDEO PLAYBACK] - You don't get vaccinated for Florida, but you do for Mexico. So I just followed that 90 pounds of excess baggage to Mexico City. She had been at the Reforma and then gone. I took the bus south like she did. It was hot in Tasca. And you say to yourself, how hot can it get? And then in Acapulco, you find out. I knew she had to wind up here, because if you want to go south, here is where you get the boat. All I had to do was wait. Near the plaza was a little cafe called La Mar Azul, next to a movie house. I sat there in the afternoons and drank beer. I used to sit there half asleep with a beer and the darkness. Only that music from the movie next door kept jarring me awake. And then I saw coming out of the sun, and I knew why Whit didn't care about that 40 grand. - [INAUDIBLE] - Si, señorita. - Señorita, señor, may I speak some words? You will be seated, señor, yes? - With pleasure, señor. - I am [INAUDIBLE],, a guide, a most excellent guide. - Indeed. - You ask them. They can tell you that [INAUDIBLE] knows Acapulco as no one else. Each little street, each-- - I don't want to go. - Very difficult girl. - Is there one not so, señor? Perhaps a lottery ticket. - No, thank you. - I have here, wrought by skilled hands, a ring and earrings of jade and pure silver. - These? - Gracias señor, gracias. [END PLAYBACK] OK, so as I mentioned before, Alfred Hitchcock is a director who is actually interested in psychoanalysis. And a lot of his films mediate these ideas around psychoanalytic concepts of gender and sexuality. So this is a clip from Rear Window. So in this narrative, a photojournalist who is played by Jimmy Stewart, has actually been in an accident. So he essentially spends the entire film really in a wheelchair with a giant cast on his leg with a telescope in his lap which he uses-- a telescope and a pair of binoculars which he uses to spy on his neighbors. And so you can think about some of the key terms from Mulvey's arguments around castration anxiety, scopophilia or pleasure in looking, fetishism, seeing a part for a whole, sadistic voyeurism, how that might come into play in this clip from Rear Window. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] [MUSIC PLAYING] - (RADIO) Men are you over 40? When you wake up in the morning, do you feel tired and run down? Do you have that listless feeling-- [RADIO TUNING] [MUSIC PLAYING] [ALARM CLOCK RINGS] - [INAUDIBLE] [CHILDREN SHOUTING] [PHONE RINGS] - Jeffries? - (PHONE) Congratulations, Jeff. - For what? - (PHONE) For getting rid of that cast. - Who said I was getting rid of it? - (PHONE) This is Wednesday, seven weeks from the day you broke your leg-- yes or no? - Gottison, how did you ever get to be such a big editor with such a small memory? [END PLAYBACK] So I also wanted to think about what Mulvey offers in the way of alternatives. So she herself was a filmmaker. And so here in this image, she's actually with director of photography Diane Tammes and Peter Wollen who was a filmmaker and film theorist, who was based in our department at UCLA for a really long time. So she made a film with Peter Wollen called Riddles of the Sphinx, which was a deliberate sort of attempt to create a feminist film language that would subvert conventional ideas around film form, objectification of women, ideas around the gaze, and so on. And so you can think of, as we watch this clip, the way that film form here subverts cinematic language and ideas around visual pleasure. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] - He should be here by now, a little boy with fair hair. - I think he's going to come across the foot bridge. - What were you asking about your little girl? - Oh, well, at the moment, she's in a community nursery where Maxine works, but I was wondering whether it wouldn't be better to have a nursery at work. Have the unionists thought about that? - Not much, really, you're lucky to get any sort of daycare let alone getting the one that suits you best. - Hello. - Hello. - [INAUDIBLE] - Give this to your mother and say thanks for waiting. - Yeah, bye. - All right, Bye. - Local authorities are cutting back on nursery education anyway, aren't they? - Yes, that's right. It may stimulate the women to demand more for themselves, though. Have the unions ever done anything at all about daycare? - No, they haven't done very much. The TUC is in favor of free state nursery care for any parent who wants it, but we're a long way from that. - I was wondering whether-- - There are some nurseries in the textile industry. And the unions do negotiate about child care there, but that's an industry that really depends on women's labor. Unless there is organized action around it, the union wouldn't have any reason to take it up. It's like most things. - We have to do something first if we want the union to take it up. - How can you make people see the connection between better wages and providing day care? - Well, trades unionism isn't just a question of wages struggles. It's about work conditions too. It has to be. - Well, in that case, might the unions get involved in running nurseries? - They might. All sorts of questions come up with workplace nurseries. Should the mothers be allowed to visit during the day? Should the [INAUDIBLE] stay open to let women shop before they collect their children? Some unions want the employers to pay for company nurseries but to have the nurseries run by unions and parents together. [END PLAYBACK] So you can see with Riddles of the Sphinx, she's not using conventional form at all. You have essentially a voiceover from a woman who is talking about child care, so social issues are integrated in this experimental way. You have the camera that is moving around 360 degrees, so not something that is following the conventions of film form, film editing, cinematography, anything like that. Another interesting example from this time period is by filmmaker Chantal Akerman. So her film, Jeanne Dielman, was made in 1975. And it was-- came out of France and Belgium. And you can think in this clip how the film seeks to create a different visual language. So this clip is only a few minutes long, but the actual feature film is three hours and 45 minutes. And most of it consists of sequences like this. So you're going to see her making veal cutlets. Most of Jeanne Dielman consists of sequences of the main character doing housework. So you can think about what the impact of that would be if you were watching it for almost four hours and what she's trying to do in terms of thinking around gender and film form in this sequence. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] [BABY VOCALIZES] [PHONE RINGS] [END PLAYBACK] So as you can see, this kind of filmmaking elicits a different kind of response to its-- from its viewer. So in your textbook, Corgan and White are interested in these different kinds of audience responses. So we'll return to this a couple of times throughout the class, but I thought I would point to them here. So one of the ways that they configure the image is to think about image as presence versus image as text. So essentially, image as presence is mainstream film form. So we allow ourselves to become immersed in the film. We allow ourselves to sort of experience the physical experience that the characters are going through. So film form essentially emphasizes the phenomenological experience of the characters. And then we also have images that show the state of mind or emotions of the characters. So you have a kind of emphasis on spectators becoming really immersed in what they're watching. As a kind of counterpoint to that, what they point to is this idea of image as text. So this is an image that demands distance, that's full of signs and codes that need to be sort of deciphered and thought about. And they can be integrated with other more immersive approaches to film, so they don't always stand on their own. But you can think about these two clips from Jeanne Dielman and from Riddles of the Sphinx and think about how they're offering a code to their viewer, how they're offering symbols or aesthetic experiments that the viewer is supposed to decipher or think about. So when you read journal articles and material for class that's making an argument about an approach to film form or an approach to gender in media, one of the things I want you to do is to think about whether you buy their argument. So you don't have to necessarily take everything that the authors are saying at face value. You can also think critically about the kind of argument that they're making. With the Mulvey piece, visual pleasure and narrative cinema, it's a little easy to do that because we're at a great historical distance now. It's been decades since it was published. And it's a piece that's really immersed within the context of 1970s feminist filmmaking in the UK. So there are lots of ways that we could critique it. And there have been lots of authors who have published critiques of that piece as well. So I want you to think about what you think of Mulvey's model, whether you completely agree that this is the way it works now, that this is something that you think is a model for all time, whether you think maybe parts of it are right but parts of it don't seem to fit contemporary filmmaking practices, or whether you think it's just all garbage, this is not the way that film form works today. So I thought I'd provide some examples from other films. So this is one from Suicide Squad, a more recent movie. And this is Harley Quinn getting suited up. And as you can see, you have pretty much the same dynamic working here. So you can think about how Mulvey's model might apply to a more contemporary sequence like this. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] [MUSIC - EMINEM, "WITHOUT ME"] [MUSIC STOPS] - What? Won't fit anymore, too much junk in the trunk? - Nah, every time I put this on, somebody dies. - And? - I like putting it on. - Goodie, something tells me a whole lot of people are about to die. [END PLAYBACK] But you also get these more ambivalent examples. So this is a sequence from the first season of Game of Thrones, where we're not necessarily supposed to think that Daenerys' objectification is a good thing. I mean, the character who is objectifying her is her brother. And eventually, her character will be empowered and see to it that he is tortured and killed. So he is the one who will eventually get punished, but we still get close ups of Emilia Clarke's body. And after she became a known actress, through the show, she had it written into her contract that she wouldn't do nudity. So you can also think about questions around labor and women performers labors. So that's something that's going to come up in Kristy Guevara-Flanagan's film, what happened to her. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] [MUSIC PLAYING] - Daenerys? Daenerys? There is our bride to be. Look, a gift from Illyrio. Touch it. Go on, feel the fabric. Isn't he a gracious host? - We've been his guests for over a year and he's never asked us for anything. - Well, Illyrio is no fool. He knows I won't forget my friends when I come into my throne. You still slouch. Let them see. You have a woman's body now. I need you to be perfect today. Can you do that for me? You don't want to awake the dragon, do you? - No. - When they write the history of my reign, sweet sister, they will say it began today. - It's too hot, my lady. [END PLAYBACK] So you have also the way-- you can think about the ways that these dynamics around the gaze and sexuality occur in same-sex relationships. So this is Bound from 1996. And I'm showing a clip from Bound, because it is a revision of the film noir. So it's by the Wachowkis. And at the time, it was considered a kind of edgy film noir. I think now it's a little dated. But you can think about the ways that it's appropriating this idea of the femme fatale for a same-sex relationship and the ways that the gaze works here in relation to both the characters on screen as well as the characters watching. So this is a movie that was released in mainstream cinemas. So you can think about whether this is being made for a mainstream audience, whether it's being made for a lesbian or queer audience. So those questions are also questions that I think more recent updates around ideas of film form and the gaze are interested in. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] - Hold the elevator. Thanks. - Oh no, shit, I didn't know he would call you. You must think I'm a total nuisance. - Not exactly. - I'm sorry. I would usually call Rashid. But I didn't know what to do, so I called Mr. Benkeeni. - He said you lost something? - Yeah, come on in. - I was doing the dishes. And just as I pulled the stopper, my earring fell in. That's why I got upset. It's one of my favorites. - You got a pot or a bucket? - Did you find it? Oh my god, I can't believe it. I can't thank you enough. You have to let me pay something. - No. - No? - Toby and [INAUDIBLE] do it, I did it. - Well, if you won't take money, how about a drink? You can't work all night. - All right, one drink. - What would you like? - Beer. - Beer, of course. Sit down. - Thanks. - You seem uncomfortable. Do I make you nervous, Corky? - No. - Thirsty, maybe. - Curious, maybe. - That's funny. Feeling a little bit curious, myself. That's a great tattoo. Beautiful labrys. Are you surprised I know what it is? - Maybe. - I have a tattoo. Would you like to see it? A woman in Upstate New York did it for me. Do you like it? It took her all day to do it. She promised it wouldn't hurt, but it was sore for a long time after. I couldn't even touch it. But now I love the way it feels. Here, touch it. - What are you doing? - Isn't it obvious? I'm trying to seduce you. - Why? - Because I want to. I've wanted to ever since I saw you that day in the elevator. I know you don't believe me, but I can prove it to you. You can't believe what you see, but you can believe what you feel. [GASPING] I've been thinking about you all day. [GASPING INTENSIFIES] [MOANING] - You planned this whole thing. You got that hearing down the sink on purpose, didn't you? - If I say yes, will you take your hand away? - No. - Yes. Please, Corky, please kiss me. [DOOR OPENS] Fuck. - Violet, Vi, are you home? - Yeah, yeah, I'm right here, Steve. [END PLAYBACK] So this is a clip from Crazy Stupid Love. So here we have the gaze aimed in a different direction. So you have Emma Stone's character looking at Ryan Gosling's character, but you could also think about differences in tone here, because it's essentially an emphasis on the comedic aspect of the gaze. As well as his physical strength is really emphasized here with the Dirty Dancing reference. - You're adorable. - No, I am sexy. I am R-rated sexy. - Mhm. - OK, I know what happens in the PG-13 version of tonight, all right? I know. It's that I get-- I get really drunk and then I pass out. And you cover me with a blanket and you kiss me on the cheek and nothing happens, but that's why I'm here. I am here to bang the hot guy that hit on me at the bar. - Jacob? - Jacob. - Are people still saying bang? - Oh, I do. We are going to bang, hmm? This is happening. Take off your shirt. - Why? - Please, please take off your shirt. - Really? - Because I can't stop thinking. I need you to do this. OK, OK, OK, OK. - All right, OK, OK, OK. - OK, OK. - Fuck, seriously? It's like your photoshopped. Can I-- - Ah, you have cold hands. Now you take off your dress. - No. - Yes. - No way, not with all that going on, no thank you. Is there dim lighting somewhere? Oh, god. OK, so then what do we do? What happens now? Like logistically, what's your move? - What do you mean what's my move? - What's your move? Like, what's your big move? - I got lots of moves. - What's your big move? - I'm not telling you my big move. - Tell me your move. - You're not ready for the big move. - Yes, I am. I want your big move. - You can't handle the big move, trust me. - Tell me your big move! - I work Dirty Dancing into the conversation. - Dirty Dancing? - Can I sit down, please? - Yeah. - Can I put back on my shirt? - No. Why Dirty Dancing? What do we do? Do we watch it? - You know the big move at the end of Dirty Dancing where Patrick Swayze picks up Jennifer Grey? - Yeah. - I can do that. - OK. - So I tell girls I can do the move. I put on the song "Time Of Your Life." I do the big move. And they always want to have sex with me. - Oh my god, that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. - I agree, but it works every time. - That would not work on me. [MUSIC - BILL MEDLEY, "TIME OF MY LIFE"] - (SINGING) Now I-- - Oh god, this is ridiculous. I don't want to do it. - Come on. - This is beyond ridiculous. - Run and jump. - No. - Yeah. - No thank you. - Come on. - Thank god I'm drunk. Here we go. So do you prefer to do it here or in the bedroom? - The bedroom is preferred. - Mhm, yeah, OK. Let's go there. [END PLAYBACK] So one of the genres where the gaze has really persisted is a kind of subgenre of maybe detective or thriller work. So you could kind of see this in True Detective Season One as a kind of exemplary case of this. [VIDEO PLAYBACK] - This is going to happen again. And it's happened before. Both. - Girl, it's fantasy enactment, ritual, fetishization, iconography. This is his vision. Her body is a paraphilic love map. - How's that? - An attachment of physical lust to fantasies and practices forbidden by society. - Did you get that from one your books? - I did. Her knees are abraded, rug burns on her back, cold sores, gum line recession, bad teeth. There's decent odds she was a prost. And he may not have known her, but this idea goes way back with him. - You got a chapter in one of those books on jumping to conclusions? You attach an assumption to a piece of evidence, you start to bend the narrative to support it, prejudice yourself. - Wait and see on the ID. - All right. - This kind of thing does not happen in a vacuum. I guarantee you this wasn't his first. It's too specific. [END PLAYBACK] What you saw in that clip around True Detective Season One is essentially a part of this resurgence within especially television around what's been called the dead girl in media. So you have a lot of cultural commentary on this kind of televisual obsession with the dead girl, maybe starting from Laura Palmer in Twin Peaks all the way up to maybe something like Sharp Objects in HBO, which got a lot of credit for being a kind of commentary on the tropes of the dead girl mystery thriller because it was told from a more female-centric perspective. So there was even an IFC panel on "TV Talk, colon, Dead Girls, a TV Obsession." So we can think about the ideas that Mulvey is presenting in the gaze which you know may be emblematic of a certain time period and film criticism, but people are still interested in the ways that gender and film form relate and the ways that the camera is still being used to objectify women's bodies in certain ways. So we can think about that in relation to one of the films that you watched, Kristy Guevara-Flanagan's What Happened To Her. So you can think about how the film subverts the idea of the dead girl as a trope, what the film suggests about how film labor works, which roles are valued, which aren't, how it plays with the idea of the image's presence and the image as textuality, which is something that Corgan and White are interested in. And we're also going to have and a session with her, so we'll talk to her a bit more about the film.