How useful has an ideological critical approach been in understanding binary oppositions in the narratives of your chosen films?

Plan:

Argument: It is through the ideology of feminism that Andrea Arnold visualises for the spectator the binary oppositions of male versus female and good versus evil.


  • Confronting the travellers/gypsies (male versus female)-use of hand-held, proximity between characters and camera, use of over-the-shoulder shots.
  • Mia and Connor sex scene (male versus female/good versus evil)- the connotations of hand-held, over-the-shoulder shots, scopophilia and the male gaze.



Andrea Arnold's fascinating film, 'Fish Tank', follows the story of an aggressive teenage girl, Mia, going through her day to day life. Her emotional connection with her mother's boyfriend, Connor, enlightens the spectator to a side of Mia that is not illuminated before his entry. However, as their love moves beyond platonic, the spectator's views on Connor immediately change and thus coincides with the animalistic representation of the majority of men in the film. Being a female filmmaker, Arnold influences her feminist ideas through the cinematography and in turn introduces the binary oppositions of male versus female and good versus evil. Ironically, most binary oppositions come to life when Mia interacts with male characters.




Towards the beginning of the film, Mia visits an abandoned area where a white horse is bounded in chains, which belongs to some travelers living on the site. Her sensitiveness is uncovered as she is determined to break the chains that trap the horse without the travelers knowing. The first time she fails and when she returns a second time it ends with the same outcome. However, this time she is intercepted by the male travelers. By characterising Mia as the protagonist, Arnold invites us to develop a strong, emotional bond with her. So when she is confronted by all the men, we are forced to feel helpless and empathise with Mia through the extremely unsteady, hand-held camera movement and it is through this feeling of discomfort that Arnold sutures the spectator into the narrative. It is the connotations of this scene that Arnold educates us with the feminist notion of the vulnerability females have when colliding with male strangers. Furthermore, she also articulates the concept of a patriarchal society where a man's dominance enforces isolation and vulnerability on the inferior female. This in turn, demonstrates the binary opposition of male versus female; the male being presented in a predatory manner and the woman feeble and subservient.



The film reaches its climax when Mia and Connor have sex. The scene begins with Mia walking downstairs late at night to find Connor drinking and watching television. As Mia enters the living room, the spectator is introduced to a very dim lit room with a slight orange wash. Through the low key lighting, Arnold immediately establishes the sexual atmosphere. The spectator is once again sutured into the narrative as Arnold uses a POV from Mia's perspective of Connor looking at her. He sits in a very relaxed manner with his hands in between his legs holding the bottle of alcohol. By placing it in this position, it is used as a symbol of a phallus and thus alters our view on the way Connor initially looks at Mia; the connotations now resemble the male gaze and present him in a more predatory light. This in turn is Arnold hitting out at masculinity and how men are sexually driven. Connor uses his role as the fatherly figure to get Mia to dance for him. At first, we think he does this to make her gain self-confidence. However, we are then introduced to a low angle, hand-held shot from behind Mia with only her lower body in shot. In the same frame, Connor is examining her. this in turn presents the shot as more scopophilic. Arnold is forcing the spectator to become part of the diegetic audience. However, we have a completely different perception of Mia than that of Connor; he gains sexual gratification while we feel a level of discomfort. It is this contrast between what Connor and the spectator sees that exposes the binary opposition of not only male versus female but also good versus evil as well. Arnold is demonstrating the ascendency of men and how they use their superiority to influence women to have sex with them. The power dynamic is visualised during the intercourse as Connor appears to be on top of Mia.



In conclusion, being a female filmmaker, Arnold's feminist beliefs strongly influence every shot in this film. It is through the neo-realist cinematography that the spectator is sutured into the narrative and thus is enabled to emotionally bond with Mia and understand her relationship with the other characters. Furthermore, she exemplifies the subordination and suppression of females especially when interacting with the dominant males. This in turn has the effect of uncovering the binary oppositions which are mainly exposed through the distinctions of the genders.

Comments


  1. Paragraph 1:
    "Enlightens the spectator to a side of Mia that is not illuminated before his entry" - overwritten
    "However, as their love moves beyond platonic." - begs the question of whether their love was ever platonic.
    "The animalistic representation of the majority of men in the film." - although one of the major characters, Billy, is definitely not animalistic.
    ...A few too many sweeping generalisations. Think clearly about your opening comments - they set the tone for the rest of the essay.

    Paragraph 2:
    "Towards the beginning of the film, Mia visits an abandoned area [...] intercepted by the male travelers." We talked about this, but there's too much retelling of the story here. You should be aiming to introduce the micro features - the way in which the scene is represented - early in the paragraph; preferably after the first sentence.
    "Arnold educates us with the feminist notion of the vulnerability females have when colliding with male strangers" - not sure to what extent we are being "educated" - in fact, this point seems rather obvious.
    "Furthermore, she also articulates the concept of a patriarchal society where a man's dominance enforces isolation and vulnerability on the inferior female." - overwritten! I know what point you're making (just), but it's quite laboured. 'Articulates' and 'isolation' are not quite right here.

    Paragraph 3:
    "The film reaches its climax" - qualify this, as it sounds as though this is the end scene of the film. Link it to the three-act structure (e.g. this point occurs altho climax of Act ...)
    "a slight orange wash" - slight? Not prominent?
    "while we feel a level of discomfort" - explain why (i.e. the idea that, as spectators, we align with Mia)
    "good versus evil" - seems like an oversimplification.
    Overall, this paragraph is GOOD! Much better than the previous. Why? Because you express your points clearly, with little unnecessary embellishment!

    Paragraph 4:
    "In conclusion, being a female filmmaker" - Hm. Check this. Not sure she's a feminist filmmaker. From what I've read in interviews, I don't know that this is the case. Don't confuse being a female filmmaker with a feminist filmmaker.

    Some really good stuff here, Elliott, especially the third paragraph. Still some waffle in places, but definitely more positives here than negatives.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

COG: How does 'City of God' represent masculinity as aggressive?

Pulp Fiction: Indiewood