Film’s Culture(s)
“Film scholars lose the unreflective innocence of passive film viewing…” J. Dudley Andrew
Welcome and Introduction:
The purpose of this paper is to leer in what ways we may learn about a culture or co-culture through the viewing of that culture’s cinema. By doing this, we may gain a better view of not only the implied importance of cinema itself, but also in what ways our own and other cultures function.
Film may seem like an unlikely topic for an intercultural communication paper; however, because of the “global village” phenomenon that we have found ourselves immersed in over the past few decades, it is almost impossible to be completely ignorant of another culture’s media. Even thought the term “foreign film” may still elicit eye rolling from many of the masses here in the United States, there is no one who cannot discern the term’s meaning.
And indeed, these “foreign films” are becoming increasingly celebrated in the United States. Once reserved exclusively for the art house crowd, other culture’s cinema is now making its way into the State’s mainstream theatres and consciousness. For example, France’s The Brotherhood of the Wolf (Pacte de Loups) was a multi-million dollar earner here. And it is not alone; more and more “foreign” cinema is making itself at home in U.S. America.
In the course of this paper I intend to conduct a cultural analysis of movies from three different cultures. They include France, the Russian Federation, and U.S. America. These three areas were chosen because of how diverse they are in their population sizes and land areas, as well as in their histories.
But ultimately, the goal of this paper is to accomplish people realize that cinema is as much an international form of communication as actually speaking with a member of a different culture directly. Also, I hope that those who read this will realize that when viewing any film, foreign or otherwise, we are looking at that culture’s ideologies in action; that culture’s values, beliefs, and worldview are presented in every frame of the film.
Thus, each film that we study, whether it is from our hold or another culture, must be approached from the standpoint of a competent intercultural communicator. We must want to understand the “other” and accept information before and during about the culture while we engage the film in an inter- or intra- cultural dialogue. And so, let us begin.
Culture and Cultural Analysis:
No intercultural paper would be complete without an exploration of what “culture” is. Clifford Geertz defines culture as “the systematic way of constructing reality that a people acquires as a consequence of living in a group (Vande Berg, Wenner, and Gronbeck 390).” Our acquire text defines culture as “human-made objective and subjective elements that…have increased the probability of survival… (Samovar, Porter, and McDaniel 20).”
Both definitions are quite valid and compose interesting statements about the way(s) that culture shapes perception. Our perceptions are formed and informed by our culture’s beliefs, values, traditions, rituals, etc… This is important to note because of the ways in which our perceptions necessarily permeate everything that we take in from the world around us and also how we process that information. This, of course, includes the way in which we view cinema.
To gape and analyze film from a cultural perspective entails several different elements because this approach is quite practically Gestaltist. Cultural analysis is rooted in several assumptions. These include the idea that a culture is a social group’s system of meanings, that to seek culture is to study meaning systems both descriptively and normatively, and that members of a society are usually complicitous in their occupy subjugation to meaning systems (Vande Berg, Wenner, and Gronbeck 394).
Some of the general concepts relied upon in cultural analysis include performance and embodiment, ideology, hegemony, race, class, and gender, and discourse (Vande Berg, Wenner, and Gronbeck 398). Performance is the enactment of social roles and identities; embodiment is a process in which ideas, attitudes, and values are given corporeal existence. Ideology in this context refers to the body of doctrine, myth, belief, etc., which guides and binds together an individual, social movement, institution, class, etc…
Hegemony explains the everyday mechanisms that an elite or dominant class exercises uses to exert control over a lower or subordinate class or group. Bustle, class, and gender are all important markers to be noted in relation to the political, socio-economic, and aesthetic realms of a society. Discourse refers specifically to discursive acts. Discursive acts are the ideological ways of thinking about and representing an vital topic area in social experiences.
All of the above elements come together to beget a critical cultural analysis of media. This type of analysis focuses on the ways in which media reflects the structured patterns and organizations of a society. That is why I think that it can be such a useful tool in Intercultural communication.
The Films:
For this paper I viewed several films from each of my chosen cultures in order to compose a cultural critical analysis that would give us insight into each. Those films that will be discussed in some detail are Night Watch and Russian Ark from Russia, Eight Women and High Tension from France, and Hard Candy and Secondhand Lions from the United States.
These films were chosen with gargantuan care and represent a wide range of genres. Other films that may be mentioned and/or recommended for viewing are Crimson Rivers and The Ordeal from France, House of Fools and Battleship Potemkin from Russia, and Particles of Truth and Dead and Breakfast from the United States.
There will be a brief summary of the spot of these films followed by an analysis of the film using some of the cultural patterns and value dimensions elaborated on in our text’s Chapter 5 (Samovar, Porter, and McDaniel 140). In extinct cultural film or media analysis a variety of elements (such as those listed above) reach into play. This is just as it should be as in any culture and especially in inter-cultural exchanges (such as some from the United States examining Chinese films) many different factors and worldviews must be taken into account.
The Analysis:
The three cultures chosen for this project are French, Russian, and U.S. American. According to the charts of Hofstede’s value dimensions located in the text, these cultures show very different value orientations. Russia is not listed specifically in piece because of its size and its being made of many different republics (Samovar, Porter, and McDaniel 141-9). But the former Yugoslavia dimensions that are shown do appear to be representative of the Russian Federation values that I’ve identified in my viewing of Russian film. And with that in mind, let’s begin the analysis of the six films that will be covered in some depth for this project.
France:
The first culture that I would like to explore through its films is the French. The two films that were analyzed relate the dread and action genres as well as the musical, mystery, and period genres. The first French film analyzed was High Tension or Haute Tension in French.
This 2003 film was directed by Alexandre Aja and starred Cecile de France and Maiwenn Le Besco. The fable follows two female friends (Marie and Alex) who retreat to a farmhouse in the very isolated French countryside to study for their law finals. On the first night there, a murderous man breaks into the house and kidnaps Alex. Marie is able to evade the man’s detection and follows him after he takes Alex. A cat and mouse game begins on the deserted highways of the French countryside with Alex as the prize.
This film showcases several very interesting cultural patterns. Among them are the individualistic nature of the French, and the ways that the French do not like uncertainty. The fact that the two leads of the film are females can also be viewed as a culture related phenomenon. It is traditional in horror/thrillers for one lead role to be female but rarely is there two.
Also, the females in U.S. American horror are almost always saved from the monster at the demolish by a male character. Not so here. The females are left to defend themselves against the madman. And the fact that France scores above the mid-range for Feminine traits may have something to do with this (Samovar, Porter, and McDaniel 149).
In regards to France’s individualistic nature, the film shows each of the women’s journey that they must take alone in an worry to survive the night. For example, Marie, the film’s heroine, does everything independent of the other characters. She alone is able to evade the madman when he breaks into the farmhouse. She alone makes the decision to set aside her own life back into pain by following the man who has kidnapped her friend. And all of the scenes in which Marie evades or confronts the man, the settings are designed to show just how alone Marie is. This increases the terror for the character and the audience, but it also drives home the point that in an individualistic culture, we all ultimately maintain that we alone will be able to face our own fates.
The film also shows us the ways that the French fear uncertainty. Everything about the film will put an audience member on edge because of the extreme ambiguity of the lighting, camera angles, and the very nature of the story. In a culture where ambiguity and uncertainty are avoided, such as the French culture, a film like this must be especially horrifying. We never know what brutalities will be behind the corner or around the next bend of the road. And that coupled with this being a culture that values Feminine traits, such as nurturance and compassion, makes the film even more gross to recognize.
Eight Women or 8 femmes is a film that pays homage to the musicals of the 1950′s. It was directed by Francois Ozon and stars Catherine Deneuve, Fanny Ardant, and Emmanuelle Beart. This plot deals with the murder of the only man in a house of eight women. The women are his mother in law, his sister in law, his wife, two daughters, his own sister, the cook and the chambermaid. After he is found wearisome with a knife in his succor one snowy morning, each woman begins to tell their secrets in an pains to discern which of them could have killed him.
This film is quite interesting for several reasons. The cultural patterns in this do show the individualism of France, but like High Tension, it also shows the importance of friendship and family in the culture. This is probably because of the culture’s Feminine orientation as well. Eight Women also reinforces the French peoples’ detest of uncertainty because the women in the film simply will not rest until they discover who the murderer is and what all the other women’s secrets are.
But other patterns are uncovered as well. For instance, this film demonstrates the high power distance of French culture by examining the social and class distinctions among the women. The mother in law and sister in law are destitute and were taken in by the dead man. Much is made of the fact that his wife was able to marry him in the first place as he was of a higher social standing than she. Also, the fact that they have not one, but two servants shows the affluence of the upper class and the power that they have over the lower classes.
All in all these films reinforce the Hofstede cultural patterns. However, they also invent us consider why exactly some of these seemingly incompatible (individualism and strong family allegiances) patterns exist.
Russian Federation:
The first Russian film that we’ll examine is Night Watch. This 2004 film combines action, anxiety, and fantasy to become the first international hit from the Russian Federation. It was directed by Timur Bekmambetov and stars Konstantine Khabensky, Mariya Poroshina, and Galina Tyunina.
This film is spot in present day Moscow and follows Anton, a member of the Night Peer that helps to support evil from overtaking the world. In the sage, the Lords of Light and Darkness, the leaders of the Immortal Others, struck a deal that no mortal could be swayed to be good or defective. Instead everyone is given a choice. To be sure that this pact isn’t broken the Night Explore and the Day Watch (comprised of Light Others and Unlit Others respectively) monitor each others activities. Anton and his partner Olga discover that an Other has placed a curse upon a mortal woman that will waste all of Moscow if they cannot uncover who placed it and make that Other remove it.
The cultural patterns most evident in this film are the Russian’s propensity to heavily favor Feminine values and the ways that they attempt to avoid uncertainty. It also shows us the ways that both individualism and collectivism are important in the “new” Russia.
The film demonstrates Feminine cultural values in the actions and motivations of the characters. The Lords of Light and Darkness decide to stop fighting each other so that they can watch over humanity. Anton, the main character, is quite nurturing and will do almost anything to ensure his newfound son’s safety.
The value of uncertainty avoidance is quite interesting to contemplate in the film. Russia was a Communist society for over 50 years and we know that the Communist regimes were not forgiving to those who opposed them. Communist citizens had to carry identification papers with them at all times. In such an environment of mistrust and suspicion, it is entirely understandable why one would want to avoid uncertainty in any form at all costs.
In the film, uncertainty threatens all of Moscow. Because a rouge Other has placed a curse on a mortal, the entire city could be destroyed in a series of unnatural disasters. Also, humans are shown to be unstable and dangerous because they have the power of free choice in ways that Others do not. Others have to choose either Light or Dark as soon as they realize that they are indeed an Immortal. Humans on the other hand are always moving back and forth between these extremes and have to be protected because of it.
The film also demonstrates how Russia is in the middle ground between collectivism and individualism. Anton is very much an individual and works alone for over a 1/3 of the movie before being given his partner. However, despite his working alone, he is still acknowledged and recognizes himself as a member of the greater group of the Night Watch. His allegiance is to the group and he uses his individualism to benefit the Light Others.
The next film is called Russian Ark and it takes place entirely in the Hermitage Museum. This was once the Winter Palace of the Tsars of Russia and is a technological marvel. The film was shot in one continuous take and is almost 90 minutes long. It had a cast of almost 2000 actors, three live orchestras, and moves through 33 of the Hermitage’s magnificent rooms.
The story concerns a modern filmmaker and a 19th century French diplomat who inexplicably become a party to witness over 300 years of Russian history as it pertains to the Winter Palace itself. The filmmaker is never named in the film but the diplomat is the Marquis de Custine. The Marquis is notorious in Russian history for having said that Russia was a land covered in art to hide its barbarism. His appearance as one of the film’s main characters is twofold. He shows the audience the love-hate relationship that much of the world has in regards to Russia and also demonstrates the European worldview in regards to much of the Italian and French artists whose works are displayed in the Hermitage.
This film is a beautiful work of art and does an amazing job of showing how the Russian people value beauty, art, and their own history. It also demonstrates the large power distance dynamic that still exists in Russia even while it celebrates their newfound freedom.
The film shows the ways that the Russian people can still be collectivist. In the film, when we move through the Hermitage, we are taken through numerous collections of art. In each collection, we see the person or people that acquired it. But these people are seldom called by name. the shared cultural knowledge lets the audience member know which historical figure is being represented. It is quite amazing to contemplate how a place as large and diverse as the Winter Palace can have each of its rooms identified by the audience members in regards to the artwork it contains and the figure who is associated with obtaining it.
The film also shows us the large power distance dynamic that is still prevalent in the Russian Federation. In the film, only historical figures are associated with art and refinement. The lower classes that we see are all laborers of some sort. Some are making coffins from the frames of large portraits during the Revolution and some are serving food to the Romano’s. But in the interactions of the film, there are definite markers of upper and lower class. Even the main characters/narrators are an upper class diplomat and a laboring filmmaker.
And one of the most affecting sequences of the film comes when the diplomat speaks about a certain Italian sculpture found in one of the halls. He makes a remark about the Russian’s not being able to make their own artwork. They either appropriated other cultures directly or copied other’s styles. The narrator disagrees but remarks, “Say what you will. We are both free, you and I.” And the filmmaker narrator repeats this several times in the film intimating that it is a thing both wondrous and new for him.
U.S. America:
The next film is from the United States and is called Hard Candy. Released in 2005 to critical acclaim but little box office, this Independent film was directed by David Slade and stars Patrick Wilson and Ellen Page. This character piece focus almost exclusively on Jeff, a 30 year old photographer, and Hayley, a 14 year old that is much more than she seems.
Jeff and Hayley have been chatting online for three weeks when they decide to meet face to face at a local coffee shop. While there, Hayley convinces Jeff to take her back to his house. When they get there, the two drink screwdrivers and decide to have an impromptu photo shoot. However, Hayley has slipped a sedative into Jeff’s drink. When he wakes up, he is bound to a chair and Hayley is in control. She wants to know what Jeff knows about a missing girl from the area that he was the last one to see. And she will do almost anything to obtain that information.
This film does an excellent job of showing the individualism inherit in U.S. American culture. But it also shows how we value Masculine traits over Feminine values.
The film is a character study of Jeff and Hayley. These two are incredibly individualistic. They don’t even have any friend or familial relationships. They are represented as being entirely alone and autonomous.
And as for the Masculine traits, this film is built on aggression. The Hayley character is filled with rage and goes to extremes that many men would find disturbing. Likewise Jeff is seen as being hypersexual and competitive. Even when he discovers that he’s been tied to a chair and could be tortured, he ups the stakes by attempting to play mind games with his captor.
The last film that we will look at is Secondhand Lions. This film was directed by Tim McCanlies and stars Robert Duvall, Michael Caine, and Haley Joel Osment. This film belongs to the comedy, adventure, and coming of age genres.
The story follows a shy boy named Walter after he is left to live with his two older eccentric uncles, Hub and Garth. These two men have lived most of their lives in Africa and have just moved back to their birthplace in Texas. Everyone believes that they are absurdly rich and various family members come in and out of the home looking for their money. At first the Uncles believe that Walter has been sent to them to find out where the supposed money is, but they soon realize that Walter’s mother simply has no interest in caring for him.
Much of the film is told through vivid, swashbuckling flashbacks that explain what the Uncles did in their years in Africa. Overall, this sweet story shows us a boy’s coming of age and that the family we have is often the family that we make for ourselves.
This film also shows us the Masculine nature of U.S. American culture but it is in no way as extreme as Hard Candy. Actually, this film takes two rough and tumble men and shows that they too can be nurturing when no one else will be.
This film also shows the ways that U.S. Americans can be quite comfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty. The young boy, Walter, is so comfortable with uncertainty that very little shakes him. He is in no way surprised that his mother is going to leave him again for “just a short while.” Walter has learned that time is relative and that nothing in his world is stable. Even his initial few weeks living with his Uncles do not begin to offer any kind of stability as they like to do what they want whenever they want.
Summary and Conclusion:
And finally, we reach the end of our journey together. Throughout this paper I’ve endeavored to show some of the ways that cinema can and should be regarded as an intercultural communication event. By using the guidelines of competent communicators when we view foreign or domestic films, we can glean more accurate and useful information on culture than if we simply watched a film and held it entirely up to our own cultural standards. By realizing that even films made here in United States still perpetuate or refute the dominant social practices, we U.S. Americans gain greater access to our own cultures unspoken ideals, values, beliefs, and attitudes.
Conversely, by keeping in mind that our culture is not the only one on earth that could be “right and proper” when viewing other culture’s cinema, we can gain not only a more enjoyable cinematic experience but also come to know another culture’s values and beliefs. Chances are good that we will be able to identify something familiar instead of always noticing the “exotic” in these films. We may also come to appreciate why the “other” culture has certain beliefs and attitudes.
Cinema may not be able to solve all of the problems encountered by intercultural communicators, but it does allow us access to other cultures in ways that other communication events do not. When the screen’s projected reality meets the audience’s reality in the middle ground of the theatre, we are all invited to become a part of the same culture and the same reality, even if it is only for 90 minutes at a time.
Bibliography
Andrew, J. Dudley. The Major Film Theories. 1976. New York.
Andrew, J. Dudley. Andre Bazin. 1978. Oxford University Press.
Eight Women. Dir. Francois Ozon. Perf. Catherine Deneuve, Fanny Ardent, et al. 2002.
Giannetti, Louis. Understanding Movies. 10th Ed. 2005. Saddle River, New Jersey.
Hard Candy. Dir. David Slade. Perf. Patrick Wilson, Ellen Page, et al. 2005.
High Tension. Dir. Alexandre Aja. Perf. Cecile de France, Waiwenn Le Besco, et al. 2003.
Metz, Christopher. Film Language: A Semiotics of the Cinema. 1964. Chicago.
Night Watch. Dir. Timur Bekmambetov. Perf. Konstantine Khabensky, Mariya Poroshina, Galina Tyunina, et al. 2004.
Russian Ark. Dir. Aleksandr Sokurov. Perf. Sergei Dontsov, et al. 2002.
Samovar, Larry A., Porter, Richard E., & McDaniel, Edwin R. Communication Between Cultures. 6th Ed. 2007. Belmont, CA.
Secondhand Lions. Dir. Tim McCanlies. Perf. Robert Duvall, Michael Caine, Haley Joel Osment, et al. 2003.
Vande Berg, Leah R., Wenner, Lawrence A., & Gronbeck, Bruce E. Critical Approaches to Television. 2004. New York.
