EUROPEAN CINEMA
Modern Languages Paper XII
Course Description
This is an optional paper, which can be taken by students in Modern Languages during their final year. It is different from most other paper XIIs in topic and teaching method, in that it is not language specific.
The course covers main trends in European cinema from the 1920s to now. By ‘European’ is meant, roughly, those countries that have an official language taught within Modern Languages at Oxford, and which are geographically in Europe. This norm excludes Great Britain, Latin-America and North Africa, and includes Poland and Greece. The course follows the development of European cinema by covering examples of avant-garde silent film, classical narrative cinema, various types of New Wave cinema of the sixties and seventies, as well as other more recent trends in film form represented for instance by Michael Haneke or Pedro Almodóvar.
Scope and Norms
The focus of the lectures is interpretative. The overarching teaching aim is that students should be able, in the exam, to interpret a cluster of films in narrative and stylistic terms, and to situate the interpretation within an appropriate (historical or theoretical) context of scholarship. The relative weight of historical material, theoretical argument, and stylistic analysis may vary: students are free to choose an approach that has either an historical, or a stylistic, or a theoretical focus. Lecturers situate each chosen film within a relevant historical and theoretical context, that is, within a particular area of scholarship. Students are encouraged in the exam to do the same.
Since the course is defined neither by a particular country, period or method, its core is the analysis of film narrative and filmic representation as they evolve through the following phases and in different national contexts:
1 Silent cinema, avant-garde movements: focus on Russia and Germany
2 Classical narrative cinema: focus mostly on France
3 Break with classical narrative cinema in Italian Neo-realism
4 Examples of New Wave films: focus on France, Germany, Russia, Spain or Greece
5 Other Modern Cinemas, including examples of films that use film narrative conceptually (Trier, Haneke) and/or of films that are grounded in spectacle (Demy, etc.)
Reading
In the course of the thirteen weeks of teaching, students will be presented with a range of historical and theoretical topics, each accompanied with its own reading suggestions. As a general frame around these topics the following reading list is suggested as a guide. Each student is encouraged to read some of these general introductory texts alongside the lectures - both in order to acquire a solid understanding of film history and of film form, and in order to be able to choose an area to write about in the exam.
General Reading
Bazin, André,What is Cinema? Vol. I and II, Berkeley, University of California Press, 2005
Bergfelder, Tim ed.,The German Cinema book, London, BFI, 2002
Bondanella,Peter,Italian Cinema, from Neorealism to the Present, New York, Continuum, 2002
Bordwell, David &Thompson, Kristin,Film Art: an Introduction, New York, McGraw-Hill, various ed.
Delgado, Maria Fiddian, Robin,Spanish Cinema 1973-2010: auteurism, politics, landscape and memory, Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2013
Eisenstein, Sergei,The Film Sense, London, Faber and Faber, 1986
Evans,Peter,Spanish Cinema: the auteurist tradition, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1999
Hayward,Susan,Cinema Studies, the key concepts, London, Routledge, 2013
Nowell-Smith,Geoffrey,Making Waves: newCinemas of the 1960s, New York, Bloomsbury, 2013
Kracauer, Siegfried,Theory of Film: the redemption of physical reality, New York, Oxford University Press, 1960
Temple, Michael ed.,The French Cinema Book, London, BFI, 2004
Indicative Film List
The scope of the course is determined by the geographical definition of European Cinema above and the conception of film history divided into five periods and types of film. The following is not a definitive but an indicative list of directors that clearly belong within the scope of the course. They are listed below according film period: 1.Silent cinema: Fritz Lang, F.W. Murnau, Sergei Eisenstein, Dziga Vertov; 2. Classical French Cinema: Jean Renoir, Marcel Carné, Henri-Georges Clouzot, Jacques Becker; 3. Italian Neo-realism: Roberto Rossellini, Vittorio de Sica, Luchino Visconti; 4. New Wave Cinemas: Jean-François Truffaut, Jean-Luc Godard, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, Werner Herzog, Andrei Tarkovsky, Victor Erice, Carlos Saura, Theodoros Angelopoulos; 5. Other Modern Cinemas: Luis Buňuel, Pedro Almodóvar, Andrei Sokurov, Michael Haneke, Lars von Trier, Jacques Demy.
Teaching
The course is taught over two terms, Michaelmas and Hilary. In Michaelmas, teaching consists in the screening of eight films preceded by a lecture, which both introduces the film and uses the film to present broader themes in European film history. In Hilary term, the teaching runs from weeks 1-5 only. This term, the screenings and lectures are accompanied by seminars. The group of students is normally divided into three smaller groups and each student is allocated to one group. The size of each group should normally not be more than 6-7 students. Students are expected to attend all lectures and seminars, since they constitute the full amount of teaching.
Each week, the group discusses together with the seminar leader a number of scenes from the film that is screened during that week. The discussion is introduced by student presentations. Each student has to give one such presentation. The presentation must focus on a significant scene from the film, explain why it is significant within the whole of the film, and suggest points for further discussion. The presentation is meant to provide each student with the opportunity to practise detailed film analysis, which is one of the skills required for the exam. The seminar leader gives detailed feed-back on each presentation. The presentation should not last more than 5-10 minutes, so that there is ample time both for discussion and feed-back.
In addition, each student must write one trial essay of 2000-3000 words. The topic of the essay should be taken from a past exam paper (available on the ‘oxam’ database). The essay should focus on one single film. Normally the film chosen will be one of the films screened during the course. The essay must be handed in by Friday of week 3. The seminar leader returns the essay with feedback during the seminar of week 4. The purpose of the essay is twofold. First it is a chance for the students to practise critical writing on film. Second, it is an opportunity for the students to test how they structure an answer to an essay question on film. The seminar leader gives feed-back both on the structure of the essay and on the quality of the film interpretation.
Exam
On the Friday of Week 5 a set of seven to eight questions are made public on Weblearn. Students then have four weeks to write a 6-8000 word essay on one of these questions. Each question is quite broad, as none is restricted to a particular country or period. The questions are framed so as to accommodate all the areas of film studies, and of film history, covered in the course during that academic year. Students have to choose one of the set questions, and they can do so with reference to their own chosen set of films. The films can belong to cultures that the student does not study. For instance, it is possible to study French and Spanish, and to write about Russian and German cinema. When quoting from the film, the student can quote the subtitles or, if the language is known by the student, the dialogue. Normally an essay will cover a handful of films – one or two films would be too few to make an argument and a large number such as ten would make the essay into a general survey. As students of Modern Languages are primarily students of literature and history, there is no expectation that the students should possess highly specialised knowledge of film history, or be able to demonstrate a very technical use of film terms. Students are encouraged to use basic, commonly used terms of film description. A small set of definitions of basic terms follows, which are all very clearly defined and developed in the book cited above by Bordwell and Thompson.
Basic Film Terms
Frame: the spatial unit of film, the border of the film image at any given time
Shot: the smallest temporal unit of the film image. A shot may have a variable frame (if the camera moves). It lasts until there is a cut.
Cut: the physical border between two shots
Montage: the organised and meaningful relation between shots. (cf. Eisenstein)
Frame scale: The distance of the camera defines a type of shot. The three basic types are: establishing shot, medium shot and close-up. Normally, the establishing shot shows a setting; a medium shot shows a number of characters together; and a close-up shows a face. There are various gradations between these three.
Narrative: The story of the film consists of a plot defined by character relationships and a sequence of events (cf. Bordwell and Thompson)
Mise en scène: the visual rendering of a story, and specifically, the spatial composition of anything appearing within the frame
Realism: a photographic and narrative rendering of social life and the physical environment. (cf. Bazin and Kracauer)
Spectator: the viewer considered as actively involved in the film’s creation of meaning (cf. Eisenstein)
Indicative Descriptors
A first-class essay will show an intelligent and precise use of relevant scholarship, and demonstrate a nuanced and convincing film interpretation. The essay question will have been answered very convincingly. The concepts that are used to interpret the films, and the detailed observations made, mutually support each other.
An essay awarded a mark in the sixties will show a good grasp of the relevant scholarship and present a coherent and quite detailed interpretation. The answer to the question will be clear and satisfactory. The essay will show that the candidate has a good understanding of film form, an adequate understanding of film history, and is able to argue convincingly.
An essay that is awarded a mark in the fifties will show some general film historical knowledge, but fail to present an entirely convincing interpretation and answer to the question. Thus, an essay that fails to get a 2.1 is often characterised by some gap in the argument, a misunderstanding of the question, or grave shortcomings in film historical knowledge. It is rare that marks are awarded in the fifties, and students often get first class marks in this paper.
1