the groundhog day project

Opening shots are of Quigley's cowboy implements. His boot. His bedroll. His saddle. His rope. His belt and cartridges. Plus, his hands, nails short. His knife. His rifle sliding into its case.Spurs going into a bag. His pocket watch. His hat. And then the map. The setup is simple enough. We've got a cowboy on our hands traveling to a faraway land, but the piecemeal shots maybe suggest a deconstruction at play. Reminds me of, at the same time, the gearing up sequence in Rambo: First Blood Part 2 and the fictitious magical costuming in Chaplin . One of the first things Quigley does, before he's even off the ship that brought him to Australia, is, on the behalf of an old woman, hit another guy between the legs with his gun. We've got basic masculine cowboy imagery, and then a nice hit to the balls to drive home the idea that... well, either we've got a serious man on our hands here, or we've got something very much else. Next thing he does is save Cora and s...

It's time to cheat a little. Today I'm watching Highlander which was not really a fixture in my life until my teens, though I did see it in the theater when I had just turned 10 and I loved it. There are numerous movies, surely, that I've skipped because they weren't fixtures. Influence doesn't have to come from repetition. Trying to figure out what some of those movies might be, though, I noticed the first few I thought of were films I had already covered in some context other than this deconstruction of my childhood experience with film. Regarding Highlander , though. Saw the sequel in '91, was amused but did not like it--if you aren't familiar with the Highlander franchise, the second film not only contradicts the post-original reality but also retcons the backstory into a thing that doesn't make sense. And, it shoves it into a near-future dystopia for no particular reason. Third one in '94 was unnecessary but held up far better than the...

The question for today is this: how do you measure a film's... Worthiness? Greatness? Must it be objective, or is the subjective as or more important? See, today, I saw Wonder Woman . (And, right now, I've got Groundhog Day playing because it's the 2nd of the month, but I'm not sure how much I might say about that film tonight. Additionally, I should probably get around to a recap entry sometime soon, but that won't be happening tonight either. Also, I'm starting to have ideas for themes for upcoming months. I think this blog might be here to stay for a while. At least until, say, August 1. That would make it three full years. But anyway, Wonder Woman ...) First, a story from just after the film. See, I'm thinking about stuff I might say in this blog all through the movie, and I'm trying to figure out how to get into the subjective versus objective thing. I mean, there's the obvious (and oft repeated here) bit from Benesh (2011) about how every...

I didn't write about the ending to Ginger Snaps 2: Unleashed the other day mostly because I just did not care for the film, and I think I posted what can best be termed a non-entry about that film before I'd even gotten to the very end. And, maybe that is a good thing because I might have had a rant in me about how the sequel did far worse than just diminish Brigitte as a character and neglect pretty much all of the metaphor and meaning vital to the original; additionally, by shutting Brigitte up in the basement, leaving her to be a werewolf trapped by Ghost (who apparently fantasizes about using her against her enemies), Brigitte becomes victim to not only the infection from her sister, not only to the attack from the new werewolf or the men at the rehab facility, but also to Ghost and to the filmmakers and the film itself. What should have been, and could have been a continuation of a story that embraced femininity even as it tackled the difficulties of adolescence for fem...

Speaking of a repetitive day-to-day, Phil Connors embodies that. I mean, in Pittsburgh, going to the station, repeating the same barely accurate weather information day in and day out, then a little banter with Nan and Kenny, then out on the town to pick up a woman to bring back to his apartment. He's already made his way through the secretarial pool, even has to avoid a few of those women. He's starting to feel as if he will never be able to settle down... at least in the moments that it occurs to him that he should. And, in an earlier incarnation of the script, he has found Stephanie. He didn't mean to treat her badly. He even told her, explicitly, that he didn't have time for a "real relationship." One of these days, a major network is going to call him up and he doesn't want to have to worry about a girlfriend or, worse, a wife, to affect his decision to go. His immediate decision to go, that is. Leave Pittsburgh as far behind him as he did Clevela...

I argued the other day , every movie is about gender. Or, at least, every movie tells us something about gender. West Side Story mostly upholds the usual gender binary. Men are men (or boys are boys) and Women are women (or girls are girls). Anita is quite... what's the polite way to call her pushy? She can hold her own against Bernardo. (She also justifies the boys fighting as them having "Too much feeling." The fact that Baby John cries is highlighted, but then again, his name is Baby John. Not the most manly name. One character that exists on a sort of brink between male and female is Anybodys. She dresses like the other boys, but the Jets mostly dismiss her because she's a girl. I think it's Action who responds to her request to be in the gang, "How else is she gonna get a guy to touch her?" It's also Action who later calls her a "freak." And Graziella calls here "an American tragedy." But, it's actually quite progre...

Scream 3 gives us a woman in the shower in its opening sequence, but at least her character’s an adult. She’s quickly dispatched, no time for depth or characterization. She’s simply a tool to... well, to make Cotton’s death even more complicated. It’s also a good example of how the female attacks are more drawn out than the male attacks (more on that below). (I’ve actually only seen Scream 3 the one time in the theater, so I’m not fully prepared for what’s coming.) But, my chosen topic for today is not strictly speaking this sequel. It may come up, but I won’t force it. ... One more thing before this gets serious again. From Merriam-Webster : randy \ˈran-dē\ adjective : sexually excited Full Definition 1 chiefly Scottish : having a coarse manner 2 : lustful, lecherous randi•ness noun Origin: probably from obsolete rand to rant. First use: 1698 Synonyms: concupiscent, goatish, horny, hot, hypersexual, itchy, lascivious, lecherous, lewd, libidinous, licentious, lubric...

Daughton (1996) argues that by the time of Groundhog Day , the world no longer supported the "traditional masculine belief system" that Phil Connors represents. She calls it "the masculinity of the 19th century" and "no longer functional for men today" (p. 141). She cites Rapping (1994) in assessing the 'juvenilized' version of American manhood [as] Hollywood's answer to a real political crisis in the meaning of masculinity... We live in a world that has made old-fashioned heroism hard to believe in... (p. 141, quoting Rapping, p. 118-9) Daughton suggests the Groundhog Day answer as follows: "In fact, the rhetorical point of Groundhog Day has more to do with its protagonist coming to appreciate the stereotypically feminine focus on connection with others, than with reinscribing the stereotypically masculine individuation and domination glorified in films.... (p. 141) (And, I believe I've quoted that passage before, but I will ...

I mentioned "phallic narcissism" once before . And, that's the next tab--a purple one--in Benesh (2011). Page 35/36, a purple tab labeled "phallic narcissism." Benesh references Christopher Lasch's (1991) book, The Culture of Narcissism which my copy seems to have been lost in one of my moves this past year. Benesh (2011) says, ...our current culture is overtly phallic-narcissistic and that Groundhog Day cleverly exploits this stage in our development. It shows us ourselves in not only the figure of Phil Connors but also in those who must relate to him, and it points us to a hopeful future. (p. 35) Then the part that I actually highlighted: Clinically, phallic-narcissism is a mild character disorder typified by a man's preoccupation with his sexual image and need to seduce women (Lowen, 1985). Metaphorically, it can describe an entire immature and overly agentic culture where feminine and communal values are suppressed and devalued. (Benesh, 2011...