Sam Dumas-Alice Tone and Mood Updated

In the Disney version of Alice in Wonderland, the tone and mood is entirely different than the two texts I analyzed prior to this. In the Disney version, not only does the dialogue create a more friendly tone, but the tone and mood are reflected in the costumes, facial expressions, and overall scenery. Because of the nature of the movie and its animated creation, a kid friendly, softer tone is reflected.
Take for instance Alice’s dress. Unlike Funkmeyer creation of Alice, where she is wearing a dull white, lace like collared dress, the Disney Alice is wearing a bright powder blue and white gown that shines through. The bright dress is then also illuminates Aiice and the other characters larger then life expressions. Juxtaposing this to Funkmeyer’s Alice, there is a clear divide. For instance take the backgrounds of still shots. In a still shot of a character in any scene, the background is made of shades of dark grey and black. The mood that is created is one of solitude and fear. Dissimilar to this, in the Disney version is Alice, any still shot provides contrast, color, and excitement. For instance, in many of the images of Alice, her blue dress is put against another bright color and/or white. This makes the image pop and allows for a more pleasant, happy image. Lastly, the difference in mood is created through the exaggeration of not just the expressions, but the costumes as well. In Funkmeyer, there is very little expression and in the costumes, there is no volume. They are just boring and flat. In the Disney version, most of the costumes are fluffy, bold, and bright. This automatically creates a perpendicular view and feeling for the viewer.

New Media Alice -Jackson and Noah project

In looking at New Media in relation to Lewis Carroll’s Alice in Wonderland, there is clearly a tradition within music in how it relates to Alice. Throughout many different genres and styles of music, Alice in Wonderland has been used as a blueprint for the expression of many different things for many different artists, including GWAR, Three 6 Mafia, The Beatles, and Pogo. Some artists use media examples of Alice to accompany their own or other people’s music, but in the end, there always is an aim at a desired effect. It would seem the criteria for each example would be that they have honed in on the experience of Carroll’s Wonderland, and furthermore ideas of being lost within it. All artists mentioned have taken the imagery and text of Alice in Wonderland to suit a new story. For example, the metal band GWAR uses the framework of a place like wonderland, a surreal world, for their narrative film “Phallus in Wonderland”. The Beatles had included Lewis Carroll on their album cover for Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club, in order to site an influence for the imagery their music was evoking. A more modern example, Pogo, an electronic musician who uses samples from kids films, utilizes the technology of youuutuuube.com and the Walt Disney film in order to create a experience of Wonderland through different forms of media. It is clear that Carroll’s idea of Wonderland is profound enough to impact those in different mediums to want to create an experience.

Paul - Alice updated

Lewis Carrol’s Alice in Wonderland is such a seminal text, it is no wonder that it has been adapted numerous times. Perhaps the most famous adaptation is the 1951 animated feature from Disney. This version combines scenes from Wonderland and its sequel, adding in some musical numbers. There was also a fairly faithful British film adaptation released in 1972. In the 1980s, Czech director Jan Svankmajer released his grim take on the story. Each version features more or less the same events as the others. However, they differ in the way the stories are told. One significant shift between the different versions of Alice in Wonderland is the way the story is framed in reference to reality and also what that reality is.

For instance, the Disney version of the story it is not clear when Alice is awake and when she is asleep until the end. At the beginning of the film, Alice runs away from her sister and chases the white rabbit down the rabbit hole. Because the change is seamless, assuming that a viewer has not read the book and is not familiar with the story, this would be taken as “reality.” Because the bounds of reality within the work have not yet been established, it would be reasonable for the viewer to assume that the events which unfold are real.

The 1972 British version is unique for incorporating some nonfiction elements into the story. This version is framed by Charles Dodgson taking the Liddell sisters out for a picnic. In a voiceover, he talks about telling Alice the Wonderland story. You also hear Dodgson reciting the beginning of the story as Alice lies on the ground. At the end of the film, we see Alice waking up, suggesting the whole thing was a dream. So not only is the fantasy world of Wonderland present along with the film’s reality, it is also shown with the historical reality.

In Jan Svankmajer’s adaptation, it is clear from the beginning that the story is a work of Alice’s imagination. The film begins with Alice and her sister sitting on the bank of a river, with Alice tossing rocks into the water. We then find out that Alice is actually sitting in a dingy apartment with a doll for a sister and a cup of tea instead of a river. Throughout the film, we see Alice’s mouth speaking the non-dialogue portions of the story. The elements of the original Alice in Wonderland are retold in the film using the objects in the room around her. The message here is that the film is the little girl’s reading of Alice in Wonderland filtered through her everyday life.

The Disney and Svankmajer versions have one storytelling element in common, though. At the end of the Disney Alice in Wonderland, the fantasy world that we have accepted as being real is revealed to be a dream when Alice sees herself sleeping. Conversely, the end of Alice, where the white rabbit is missing, causes the viewer to question whether what they just saw actually happened. The 1972 version attempts to do something like this, but the effect is greatly diminished because of the storytelling techniques. Dodgson starts telling the story at the beginning of the film, but it ends with Alice waking up. It is not clear whether the events of the film were the story or Dodgson’s story. Because the events are fantasy either way, we never question what was real. This makes the twist much less effective.

The differences between the reality/fantasy framework speak to the aesthetics of each film. What is interesting about Alice in Wonderland is its blending of real and imaginary. We take the fantasy elements for granted in the Disney adaptation because it is a children’s animated movie that gives itself entirely to the fantasy. One of the most striking characteristics of the 1972 version is its devotion to the original story. This explains why it was framed within historical reality rather than its own fantasy world, eventually leading to the confusing ending. Because it stays faithful to the story, Alice has to wake up at the end, but that conflicts with the reality that the film has laid out. The Svankmajer version asks us to reevaluate what we know about fantasy and reality in ways that the other two adaptations do not. The Disney and 1972 versions seem to be more concerned with telling the story and moving between musical numbers than they do with making the audience think. This is because the first two films were made to be viewed widely by children, not the cineastes that will probably end up seeing Svankmajer’s version.

Paul, Alice Comparison

Lewis Carrol’s Alice in Wonderland is such a seminal text, it is no wonder that it has been adapted numerous times. Perhaps the most famous adaptation is the 1951 animated feature from Disney. This version combines scenes from Wonderland and its sequel, adding in some musical numbers. Nearly four decades later, Czech director Jan Svankmajer released his grim take on the story. Both versions feature more or less the same events as the other. However, they differ in the way the stories are told. One significant shift between the different versions of Alice in Wonderland is the way the story is framed in reference to reality.

For instance, the Disney version of the story it is not clear when Alice is awake and when she is asleep until the end. At the beginning of the film, Alice runs away from her sister and chases the white rabbit down the rabbit hole. Assuming that the viewer has not read the book and is not familiar with the story, this would be taken as “reality.” Because the bounds of reality within the work have not yet been established, it would be reasonable for the viewer to assume that the events which unfold are real.

In Jan Svankmajer’s adaptation, it is clear from the beginning that the story is a work of Alice’s imagination. The film begins with Alice and her sister sitting on the bank of a river, with Alice tossing rocks into the water. We then find out that Alice is actually sitting in a dingy apartment with a doll for a sister and a cup of tea instead of a river. Throughout the film, we see Alice’s mouth speaking the non-dialogue portions of the story. The elements of the original Alice in Wonderland are retold in the film using the objects in the room around her. The message here is that the film is the little girl’s reading of Alice in Wonderland filtered through her everyday life.

The two versions have one storytelling element in common, though. At the end of the Disney Alice in Wonderland, the fantasy world that we have accepted as being real is revealed to be a dream when Alice sees herself sleeping. Conversely, the end of Alice, where the white rabbit is missing, causes the viewer to question whether what they just saw actually happened.

The differences between the reality/fantasy framework speak more to the aesthetics of the Svankmajer version that to the Disney one. What is interesting about Alice is its blending of real and imaginary. We take the fantasy elements for granted in the Disney adaptation because it is a children’s animated movie that gives itself entirely to the fantasy. It asks us to reevaluate what we know about fantasy and reality in ways that the Disney version does not. The Disney version seems to be more concerned with telling the story and moving between musical numbers than it does with making the audience think. This is because the Disney film was made to be viewed widely by children, not the cineastes that will probably end up seeing Svankmajer’s version.

Sam Dumas Alice Comparison-Tone & Mood

After viewing multiple Alice in Wonderland movies as well as reading both Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass, one of the main differences in the viewing experience as a whole was a result of the mood.  In Lewis Carrol’s Through the Looking Glass, and Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland as well as the Disney Alice in Wonderland movie, an overarching mood of magic, illusion, and brightness ring true.  However, when comparing these to Funk Meyers Alice in Wonderland, much of this mood is lost, thus creating a whole different viewing experience.  As a way to compare the two, I am going to take two different scenes throughout two of the text, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderlands and Funkmeyer’s bizarre rendition and juxtapose them in terms of mood and its creation.

            In Funkmeyer’s Alice in Wonderland, the opening scene is a very chilling start to a previously children friendly story.  When Alice in sitting in the grass throwing stones into the water, the movie immediately shifts.  First off, the expression on Alice’s face mirrors the tone for the rest of the movie.  She does not look confused, nor does she look timid.  Her facial expression is one of intensity, slight dark curiosity, but most of anticipation.  Next, the repetition and quietness of Alice while she throws the rocks into the water is an opening scene out of a horror movie.  The mood is so strong that if a viewer did not know the story of Alice they would not eliminate the possibility of a killing, rape, or some other dark, intense action.  The speed at which she throws the rocks and the way the rocks hit the water are at a slow, still pace, a speed that is present throughout the entire movie.  As each rocks splashes into he water, Alice does not change her expression.  Her face is still, and so is the sound.  As she reaches for more rocks in her dress, the camera pans to the left to view the person next to her.  The mood is one of questioning, quietness, and slowness.

            In Lewis Carrol’s Alice’s Adventure’s in Wonderland the first scene is written with a gentle, more children friendly tone.  To begin, there is no emotion of a rock.  This object is replaced with a chain of daisies for which Alice is putting together.  The rock is a symbol of a hard, rough, colder exterior while a daisy is associated with warmth, summertime and gentleness.  In addition to this, the tone of Lewis Carrol’s first five sentences give power to Alice.  By this I mean that his narrative is one that reflects on Alice and the power for her to make her own decisions.  This is apparent when it says, “so she was considering in her own mind (as well as she could, for the hot day made her feel very sleepy and stupid), whether the pleasure of making a daisy chain would be worth the trouble of getting up and…” (9-10).  Contrast this to the lack of knowledge that Alice is even sitting next to her sister in the opening scene of Funkmeyer, never mind, have power of her own, it is clear that the tone is completely different.  Carrol’s way of giving  status to Alice through her decisions is completely lacking in Funkmeyer’s version where it is shown that Alice is miserable, depressed, and has nothing left to do but aimlessly throw rocks into the water in a repetitive motion.

 

 

Sam Dumas-Sholay

As with all movies, Sholay has its own unique and individualistic style.  Its visual aesthetic is of course based upon the normative standard of Bollywood films in general.  With dramatic story lines that twist and turn like a soap opera, to the musical dance numbers, Bollywood has a somewhat rigid and fixed style.  In Sholay, things are no different and the visual style is not only stunning, but very structured as well in that way that it highlights certain aspects of the camera.  Both foreground and background are extremely affected by the extremely vibrant colors represented in the Holi Ke Din Song.  This musical number is entertaining, but its art is present in how the clouds of color highlight different physical spaces within a scene.

            First off, in Sholay, the bursts of color in this particular scene, coming from the throwing of colored ‘smoke’ (whether it be purple, red, blue, green), has the effect to build from the background to the foreground.  What I mean by this is if you take a very close look at this approximately six minute scene, in many of the sub-shots where there is depth, the colors of smoke are being thrown in the background and slowly make there way to the foreground where the camera is.  This sounds obscure, but that fact is that they either stop right behind the desired focal point, or in about three particular points, approaches the camera and clouds out the camera.  This is seemingly used to gently go from once shot to the other.

            The second use of the colored smoke is in framing.  By framing I am speaking of the different camera emphasis that is provided through the use of the smoke. I have a few examples of this amazing scene to prove my point.  In one shot, the camera is facing towards a ferris wheel with a box underneath it.  The ferris wheel is on the left side of the shot and is the focal point for this very short shot.  On the right side, different colors of smoke are used to cloud out that right side so that the viewer automatically looks at what is visual, being the ferris wheel.

            In addition to these two visual experiences, I also noticed how the women’s head dressed, those in the background and foreground, somewhat matched the colors of smoke that were present in the foreground/ background.  This created a direct link between foreground and background.  This reminds me of Magnificent Seven in that in that movie, the camera held a direct link through the narrowing of camera and clear visuals.  In Sholay, the only difference is that he link between foreground and background is made with color while Magnificent Seven used visual clarity and narrowing.

Paul - Comparison Expanded

The films The Seven Samurai, The Magnificent Seven and Sholay have many similarities. Many lines can be drawn between the three both in theme and content. For instance, many of cowboys are essentially facsimiles of the earlier film’s samurai. The heroes of Sholay do not correspond to any particular characters, but the cowboy aesthetic is in full effect. While there are many such ties, there are also quite a few points of difference. One of the most obvious differences is in the dynamic between the townspeople and their protectors. Both in their interactions and their personal views of one another, each film is a product of their respective settings.

In The Seven Samurai, the interactions between the samurai and the farmers are primarily motivated by the cultural norms of feudal Japan. One of the central tenets of a samurai’s persona and lifestyle is their pride. The thought of doing a favor for a poor group of farmers was unthinkable. This is evident when the farmers first begin approaching samurai. They seem to be angered by the fact that such lowly people would even approach them. Even the most humble of the samurai in the film carry themselves with an almost aristocratic bearing. Throughout the film, the samurai occupy a separate sphere from the rest of the townspeople. They are given all of the rice and housing space while the farmers must eat millet and sleep in barns. The only one of the group who has any kind of extensive contact with the farmers is Kikuchiyo, who often regards them with complete contempt. The film often goes on to support his views. The farmers are often shown to be unintelligent, petty and easily unnerved. Take, for example, the scene in which the town attempts to lynch a captured bandit. The viewer is clearly meant to side with the disapproving samurai, whose code of honor forbids them from killing such a prisoner.

In The Magnificent Seven, the dynamic between the cowboys and the farmers are much more conventional for the time and place it was created. While the cowboys are initially greeted coldly, they eventually become a part of the town. After finding out that the farmers were starving themselves to feed their protectors, the cowboys offer to eat with them. Throughout the film, the cowboys are usually occupying the same space as the townspeople. During the final battle, the cowboys and farmers fight alongside one another as equals. In fact, when it looks like the heroes are on the ropes, it is the farmers who save the day, wielding machetes and shovels. Bernardo acts as the mouthpiece of the group when it comes to their feelings about the townspeople. When he is talking to the children, he tells them to respect their fathers for living the hard life of the farmer.

In Sholay, the two protagonists have a unique relationship with the townspeople. Sholay is unique distinct among the three films as the one where there is the least interaction between the heroes and the farmers. In fact, aside from their conversations with Thakur and the romantic subpolots, there really is no meaningful connection between the two groups. The disconnect between the villagers and the heroes here does not come from social status, but from geographic location. Throughout most of the film, Basanti chastises Veeru for his “city” mannerisms and constantly reminds him that they are in the country. This divide appears once again during Veeru’s suicide attempt. While he delivers his overwrought monologue, the onlookers talk amongst themselves about how none of them completely understand what Veeru is talking about. When it comes to the battle scenes, there is no interaction at all between the heroes and the farmers. Whereas the heroes of the other films fought side by side with the villagers, Jai and Veeru single-handedly eliminate scores of bandits while the townspeople run and hide. It seems as if they only exist to get killed and then rescued by the heroes.

As stated above, the differences between the three films’ treatment of the hero/farmer dynamic reveal much about their historical basis. Most notably, the class system was much more rigid in feudal Japan than in the old west. As portrayed in countless media, the old west was a place relative freedom and only a loosely established ethical code. For seven drifters to help some poor Mexicans in exchange for food does not seem so ludicrous. By contrast, it is rather far-fetched for seven samurai to break the strict feudal class lines and become a help some peasants. This is somewhat mitigated by the fact that even though they are helping out, they never forget that they are above the people they are protecting. Both movies’ theme of food help drive this home. As mentioned above, when the cowboys find out that the farmers have been starving themselves, they all look ashamed and invite everyone to share their food. In The Seven Samurai, the samurai only help the peasants in the most dire of circumstances. First, Katsushiro tosses a coin on the ground so the peasants can buy more rice. Afterwards, he seems ashamed of his minimal generosity. Later, the group gives up their rice only when they learn about the old woman starving to death. Sholay has an interesting take on this dynamic because the two heroes are notorious criminals. In fact, in between shootouts, Jai and Veeru are usually shown napping or getting drunk. Rather than stooping to help the village, Jai and Veeru are often looked down upon by the townspeople, most notably Basanti’s aunt.

As I wrote earlier, these differences are largely based on the time and place that each is set. For instance, the old west of The Magnificent Seven was a place of relative freedom and equality. The appeal of going west was to start a new life in near-complete freedom, so everyone was more or less equal. There were no aristocratic drifters comparable to the ronin of feudal Japan. Even more stratified was the strict caste system at work in rural India. This may be part of the reason why the heroes of Sholay were recast as outlaws. It would be unthinkable for an Indian noble to take pity on those of a lower caste. By making the protagonists below the farmers, it led to a realistic situation where they would be able to help out. In addition to historical reasons, the environment in which each film was released was also conducive to their content. Japanese cinema has a long history of films that are so accurate as to be impenetrable to western audiences (Kinji Fukasaku’s labyrinth Yakuza epics come to mind). If translated directly, the historically accurate attitudes of the samurai would appear cold-hearted to Americans. Such thoughtless actions would never appear in a traditional American film like The Magnificent Seven. Much like Japan has its cinematic traditions, American cinema has a history of producing films featuring populist heroes, like those seen in The Magnificent Seven. Just as that film was a product of the Hollywood system, so Sholay is a reflection of many Bollywood tropes. The Bollywood style is essentially a catalogue of Hollywood clichés amplified to ridiculous extremes with goal being entertainment over any kind of logic. In this case, the makers of Sholay have taken the Hollywood western and turned it into something more entertaining. This is why, instead of the semi-plausible plot of The Magnificent Seven, Sholay features two men mowing down armies of bandits while still having time to woo local girls and break out into song. This also accounts for why the villagers are never seen fighting back against the bandits. Sholay has taken the American film trope of the masculine hero to such an extreme that the heroes do not need any help to kill their enemies.