An Odd Path to Success

Title: An Odd Path to Success

Name: Elizabeth Moll

Personal Response to Film:

 The Seventh Seal directed and written by Ingmar Bergman holds the key to allegoric success. That is, if you’re able to actually keep your eyes open the entire movie. I could not. I learned more about The Seventh Seal from reading about it, than I did from watching it. It is not particularly obscene or offensive. In fact, the 1957 film has obvious thematic differences than modern philosophical films; nevertheless, it has a strange way of making me cringe. Parts of the film, like when Jof was forced to dance like a bear at the inn, had me involuntarily looking away. The weirdness extruded from the film on many occasions in which I was unable to psychologically cope. This all being said, there is meticulous attention to detail that Bergman was able to portray to us regardless of its low-budget making.

                Bergman gave us a film that had depth. Sometimes, people get it; sometimes, people don’t. I’m not sure which of those people I actually am. The film was weird, but there’s so much there, its hard to decipher if those moments of eccentricity are genius or are just odd, without any other good way of putting it. It wasn’t until after I read analysis on the film, that I was able to make any sense of significant references made throughout. I only had my feelings from the film to work from. For instance, I knew right away that Jof and Mia we’re different from other characters in the film. They had a sense of true love that other characters didn’t have. That portion made me think about what it means to have love in life. When the knight is exploring for answers about faith, life, and death, there is this isolation and emptiness in him. As like other characters in the film, he searches for meaning.

Many characters like Jons, the blacksmith, the blacksmith’s wife, Jonas, the mute women, all have something they can’t quite put together to make meaning from their lives. In that, they are all missing real love. The kind of love Jof and Mia have. Yet, the film is way deeper than some love story, and Jof and Mia clearly have a different meaning within the film. I had no idea really what that was, but with all the other religious symbols and allegoric references, I knew they had an important point to prove on the odd path to Bergman's success.

Summary to Critical Article:

                Norman N. Holland (1959) wrote a wired critical analysis he titled “’The Seventh Seal’: The Film as Iconography”. In this analysis, Holland parted with outside sources and focused the bulk of it on seeing the film for exactly how it is. A step-by-step examination showed how there is deep biblical meaning throughout the film. As Holland (1959) put it, “Bergman is going beyond the Totentanz, trying to answer the further question: If death is the only certainty, where is God?” (p. 267). Holland suggests that the question is exactly what the Knight, Antonius Block, is searching for. Upon that search, and his masterful game play with Death itself, Antonius happens upon many viewpoints. One that Holland points out is how the townspeople blame God for their misfortune, particularly the black plague that plays a paralleling story to the film. Then Holland is confronted with the religious pressed crucifixion of the witch. Then, above all, Antonius meets Jof, Mia and their baby. Who Holland says is a straight and clear reference to the Holy family (Joseph, Mary and baby Jesus). Holland makes simple of the multifaceted film into a religious journey for both the main character, Antonius, and viewer. By implying that Bergman laid the answers out for us, Holland (1959) writes, “the crusader’s quest gives us the answer. Though the knight himself seems to never learn it – or to learn that he has learned it” (p. 267).

Response to Critical Article:

                Although I’m flattered by Norman N. Hollands suggestion that I as a viewer knew all the ‘obvious’ answers and religious allegory, I’m afraid to say I had really no clue. I enjoyed reading Hollands article, if for nothing else, it allowed me the opportunity to understand the film without having to figure out all the answers for myself (even though he thought it was apparent).  However, Holland did gift me with what I was looking for: A clear religious reference for Jof and Mia. Holland (1959) wrote, “The Seventh Seal finds God for us – or at least another certainty than Death – not in the wormwood-and-gall institutional religion of suffering and crucifixion, but in the simple life of a strolling actor and juggler named Jof (Joseph), his girl-wife Mia (Mary), and their baby” (p. 268). This confirmed my original feeling that Bergman created Jof and Mia different from other characters. Holland wrote a solid article portraying exactly how Jof in particular was easily referenced to the Holy family. Such as, “Jof is the only one who can see the allegorical figure of Death” (Holland,

1959, p. 268). That is, besides Antonius. Once Holland points that out, a lot more of the film came together for me. I could easily see how Antonius not only saved them, but protected them and ultimately gave his life for them.

                Holland really gave a basic overview of the many religious references in the film. I’m grateful to be able to go back, after reading his article, and pick up on those things that he cited. Holland didn’t go much beyond that, which I really appreciate. Since the films complexity goes deeper than what Holland wrote about, it gives the viewer the opportunity to discover more on his/her own. Even though I have a hard time getting through the whole film, I would take more time studying the chess game or even the ocean that hints as a symbol throughout the film.

Consideration of Critic’s Use of Critical frameworks/concepts:

                Norman N. Holland’s 1959 article viewed The Seventh Seal with a formalist eye. The structure of Hollands article was formulated around the plot of the film. This was a key indicator that he used a formalist approach in his article. At the same time, he used the plot to drive a unified idea around the religious allegory and symbols used. A great deal of time was spent on what Holland believed to be writer/director Bergman’s secret meaning that Holland charitably exposed for his readers. This gave viewers a meaningful foundation for watching or re-watching the film.

Film Analysis: 

                At times, certain scenes of puzzling films will pull together several elements to create meaning for the viewer. In The Seventh Seal, this type of scene was during the final chess game between Antonius and Death. A few important elements were combined in this scene that helped make sense of a lot of questions leading up to this point. Right before this part of the scene, Jof found Antonius and Death playing chess, then rushed Mia and their baby to get away. Antonius knew Jof had found them, but because Death was facing the opposite direction, he did not. The scene starts with several over the shoulder straight cuts between Death and Antonius. This is in silence. Nothing but the narration provides sound for the viewer. The focus at this point is on narrative, rather than any elaborate thematic style. What made this scene great was the intricate details that Bergman allowed the viewer to participate in.

The elements being pulled together here are the allegoric Jof, Mia and baby, the symbolic chess game and the rescuer, Antonius, who needed to make meaning of his life and did just that within this scene. As mentioned before, the scene starts with the two playing chess, the game that is literally life or death for Antonius, and an opportunity to out-wit Death (whether Antonius actually wins the game, or not). Death is convinced Antonius is hiding something. Then as Antonius commits to saying there is nothing to hide, Death ironically says that nothing escapes him, then asks Antonius if he's afraid. This happens moments before Antonius decisively knocks pieces of the chess game down, allowing for Death to cheat when replacing them. What is interesting, is that immediately before Antonius knocks the pieces over, he briefly looks up. This moment of slight head lift is the decisive moment where Antonius decides not to be afraid; therefore, giving his life for Jof, Mia and the baby. The next moment Antonius looks up, beyond Death, is when the camera takes a subjective point of view to see the wagon pulling away, out of the woods. His plan worked.

               

If Ever, Oh Ever a Wiz There Was?

If Ever, Oh Ever a Wiz There Was?

Elizabeth Moll

Personal Response to Film:

                The Wizard of Oz film is a timeless classic that has brought the world of fantasy to viewers for more than seventy years.  It’s been credited for its’ masterful Technicolor use, its’ timeless musical adventure, and for me, its’ ability to scare me straight under my blankets. Objectively, the film is a  not short of masterpiece. Plain and simple. It takes the viewers on a magical journey to ‘The Land of Oz’, while explicitly teaching themes about good and evil, finding the true potential in yourself and, of course, realizing there’s no place like home. That’s good and all, but has no real standing with a 6-year-old.

                I’m not exactly sure how old I was when I first saw the film, but my family loved to watch it. So I spent more of a portion of my childhood then I would have liked, watching this film. I can say, there were parts of the movie I enjoyed when I was younger – the good witch Glinda floating in her pink bubble, the cast first entering into Oz, those beautiful ruby red slippers. But mostly, I didn’t enjoy it at all. For instance, I’m terrified of tornados. I attribute part of my fear to this film. I remember having dreams about tornados sending me off to the Wicked Witch of the Wests’ castle and her freaky flying monkeys bringing me home. Even ‘good’ characters like, the Scarecrow, the Tin Man, and the Lion frightened me with their personifying qualities. Really, the film just never sat with me well.

                Watching it again for the first time as an adult, it wasn’t much better. It still worried me and I was worried that my childhood nightmares would resurface. Luckily they didn’t. I was, however, able to glean the brilliant qualities from re-watching it as an adult. Like many critics claim, the 1939 film is an astonishing cinematic success of its’ time. The director took an already great story and complimented it with brilliant cinematic elements. It also bears the qualities of an impressive musical. Many even say it’s a thoughtful tale filled with allegoric characters, figures and events. I’m not convinced that the author of the book, L. Frank Baum was the wonderful wizard people think he was, but there was definitely more going on in his book and this film, than meets the eye.

Summary of Critical Article:

Title: “The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism”

Author: Henry M. Littlefield

                Henry Littlefield’s historical point of view in his article derives from a thorough look at the life of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz author, L. Frank Baum. Although not a biography of Baum, Littlefield does describe many aspects of Baum’s world in order to support ideas in his article, “The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism”. Littlefield depicts Baum as a small town, prairie life man from South Dakota. South Dakota at the time, was filled with western farmers that were preparing for a revolt in what became known as the Populist Party. Littlefield (1964) writes, “The populist movement symbolized a desperate attempt to use the power of the ballot” (p. 49).  He goes on to write how the populist party became a cornerstone for allegory in Baum’s book. Characters like the Tin man (once a woodsman), who was worked tirelessly into a machine, and the Scarecrow thought of as a ‘straw-headed’ man whose actually quite capable, represent the populist view. Littlefield also proposes other allegories in Baum’s book: The Lion literally being politician William Jennings Bryan, Emerald City being the nation’s capital, and even the flying monkeys being the plains Indians. These various allegories imply that Baum used his book as a way to make note of the upheaval in America at the time. Littlefield’s article paralleled the similarities found between Baum’s book and America during a time when big changes were to come, and the wizard of writing held all the hidden secrets.

Response to Critical Article:

                Henry Littlefield wrote a solid article revealing the allegory within L. Frank Baum’s’ The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. The article related the book much to the Populist Party of the late 1930’s. Although there were many interesting concepts explored, Littlefield summed it up best for me when he writes, “It is an indigenous creation, curiously warm and touching, although no one really knows why” (1964, p. 47). Whole-heartedly, I have no clue to why this film has been such a timeless sensation. I don’t particularly enjoy the movie, as I’ve earlier expressed. However, I do know that the film has a way of helping you escape reality, then have you praying for Dorothy’s safe arrival back home to Auntie Em. So for me, Littlefield just about perfected my views in that one sentence.

                The basis of Littlefield’s article explores the idea that Baum’s story was a direct resemblance of the populist movement. I have a hard time allowing myself to believe that there is an allegoric explanation to just about everything in the story. With all the different interpretations out there, the credibility of Littlefield’s viewpoints become less and less. The article provides a blanket explanation from a historical standpoint, which provides much to be appreciated. It definitely raises some questions about Baum’s intentions when he wrote this. That being said, part of writing is imagination. And just because some parts seem comparable to America and the populist viewpoint, doesn’t mean that Baum created an imaginary world consciously interpreting those. It would be interesting to see how Littlefield views the movie in comparison to the book.

                I did really like how Littlefield expressed some important themes. Themes in stories, likened to historical events, are more telling and valuable. It’s easier to see how Baum may have used these in his book rather than an entire story filled with allegory. The one that stuck out to me the most was the silver shoes. Littlefield (1964, p. 55) writes, “While goodness affords a people ultimate protection against evil, ignorance of their capabilities allows evil to impose itself upon them.” The silver shoes provided protection for Dorothy, but her ignorance of her own ability to get home allowed the evil to impose itself. This type of life lesson bridges the book and the late 1930’s America in a much more convincing way.

Consideration of Critic’s Use of Critical frameworks/concepts:

                It was immediately obvious that Henry Littlefield took a historical approach in his critical article.  He spent a long time describing L. Frank Baum’s life and the events of America around the time Baum wrote the story. It’s clear that he related the work to the populist movement of the late 1930’s. Littlefield even went as far as suggesting that characters from the story are direct representations of political figures.

Film Analysis:

 

                The director and crew of The Wizard of Oz have a lot to be praised for. The film is filled with unique storytelling film elements that enhance an already picturesque concept. One of the scenes I really enjoyed was the poppy field scene when the characters (Dorothy, the Tinman, the Scarecrow and the Lion) see Oz from a substantial point of view. The scene starts with an establishing shot of the field exhibiting the striking Technicolor in full bloom leading right up to the point we are reintroduced to the characters. The next shot we see is a straight cut to behind the characters. It became one of the more memorable shots because the view has full sight of the characters, the poppy field and Oz all in one. Then a series of straight cuts to medium and close-up shots give full expression of the characters’ excitement to be so close to Oz that you are feeling the anticipation with them. This elation continues as the camera moves with the running characters during a tracking shot. The viewer again gets a straight cut to a subjective view of Oz. The moment is so powerful that it makes the next part of the scene chilling even though the environment feels anything but. You know right away something is wrong when the camera moves right into a close-up of a distressed and tired Dorothy. Then as she calls for Toto, you get a straight cut to see him lying on the ground. At this point the camera back up to a medium and then a long shot of the characters, likely to show that their cries for help are answered with nothing more than an open field. That is, until a lap dissolve of Glinda appears of her waving her magical wand. The viewer gets to have an objective view of both the characters and their troubles and then of Glinda rescuing them. This scene is crammed with purposeful film elements that perfectly move the storyline along, all while getting to see the magical Technicolor dream world.  

References:

Littlefield, H. M. (1964). The Wizard of Oz: Parable on Populism. American Quarterly, 16(1), 47.