PennTags Feed for /tag/love_and_death

"When Films 'Quote' Films They Create a New Mythology" by Roger Copeland

    Copeland starts off by saying that when filmmakers grew up as film-watchers they don’t create films about the “real world,” but a world “mediated” through other films. He claims that George Lucas’s Star Wars “makes so many references to earlier films and styles that it could just as easily – and perhaps more accurately – been called ‘Genre Wars.’” Many young directors from this era (the mid-seventies) such as Lucas and Scorsese create films out of nostalgia for Hollywood’s past.   He says that the first filmmakers to make films that dealt with reality as much as they did with old films were French new wave filmmakers such as Truffaut and Godard. He says it is no mistake that these great filmmakers were well versed in the history of cinema and spent their early careers as film critics. Copeland calls the films by Scorsese and Lucas the “Americanizing of the New Wave sensibility.”
    Allen according to Copeland is “not as cinematically knowledgeable” as his counterparts from the era. However, he discusses all of the points from Allen’s films in which he references other great films of the past. He discusses the references to Bergman, Eisenstein and Bogart in his various films from the seventies. The references in films to other films trickle down into our daily lives, which creates a world where not all of our actions are necessarily original. In some ways, many of us emulate our favorite characters in films; it’s not just great directors copying other directors, but people copying their favorite characters. Past artwork has become the foundation for which new artists can build. These ideas being recycled through film and our daily lives creates a new mythology.
    Woody Allen draws from the ideas of past works to mold them into his films. Love and Death is no exception. It builds upon ideas of past filmmakers and intertwines them into parody. Even though many of the ideas and scenes in the film seem ridiculous, it takes an intelligent viewer to read beyond the laughs and into the past artists that shaped them.

"What is Film Humor?" Harry Schein

    Schein wants to make sure that the reader understands that his article is not speaking of “the humor typified by physiological reflexes such as smiling or the gleam in the eye. This article deals only with the kind of humor that releases laughter.”(24) The film humor genre may have begun with the Lumiere Brothers film about the gardener. It has evolved away from its sadistic beginnings, but much of the humor that is still present involves maliciousness. Schein claims that humor depends on the audaciousness of the humorist and how much a person can identify with the victim. “Humor’s first rule is that the humorist may lose neither his tempo nor his temper.”(27) One area of humor in film that Schein discusses is the parody. He says that “to parody a film in a film presents enormous possibilities.”(31) In contrast, he says that to parody a novel in a film is very difficult and can leave the viewer in “a blind alley.”(31)
   Schein analyzes the qualities of humor and tactics used by such film humorists as Tati, Chaplin and the Marx brothers. Of all of their styles he seems to enjoy Tati’s the most. Schein comments that the film’s humor works with predominantly visual material that seems to be purely intellectual at the same time. Every sequence in the movies also contains many formal associations. Tati combines these factors with “a casual nonchalance that is master proof of a humorist.”(32)
   Harry Schein would have liked the humor in Love and Death for a variety of reasons. The film does not simply make the viewer smile to himself, but it contains many moments of hilarity that force the viewer into convulsions of laughter. Allen’s film never loses its tempo and provides many situations in which the viewer is able to relate to Boris as a victim. Tati’s style of comedy is emulated by Love and Death. The film at its base contains the visuals of Tolstoy’s Russia and uses this as a springboard for intellectual conversation and humor. These factors combined with the references and associations that Allen makes to many other works yield what would be “master proof” to Schein that the film is a great work of humor.

"The Aesthetics of Parody" G.D. Kiremidjian

    According to Kiremidjian a parody must have three basic characteristics of structure and behavior. First, a parody must originate from the original in its form and content and focus on the duality between the two. Second, it must raise the question as to how the original relates with the parody. The viewer must be forced to think about how the aesthetics of one relate to the other and whether or not the viewer receives something from the new version. The third point is that in the Aristotelian sense parody is not really art. (It imitates another work, not real life.) This is problematic for the author, who arrives at the idea that parody imitates art, which in turn reveals something about the original piece. He exclaims that parody does indeed become an art form in its ability to examine the original piece and exploits it for the purpose of self-exploration and curiosity.
   Once Kiremidjian establishes that parody is indeed an art form that can be benefited from he examines what makes for a good parody. He states that an artist “must grasp the essentials of the style of a given author or a school of authors, and then proceed to concoct an outlandish episode which is expressed in that style.”(235) Parody must then act as a critique of some sort of the original work. This can only be done effectively, if the artist has a strong grasp of the original work(s) and has a purpose for creating the parody.
   Following the philosophical logic of Kiremidjian, Allen’s Love and Death indeed qualifies as art and as a parody. The film manages to provide the viewer with the impression that Allen has a strong grasp for every facet of the works he is parodying. The references to a multitude of works are clear. His critique of these works emanate a sense of purpose with humor that is clearly outlandish in its content.

The Comic Mind: Comedy and the Movies by Gerald Mast

    This book attempts to chronicle film comedy from the silent era all the way through the end of the 1970s(when the book was published.) The work covers the first crude attempts at humor by Edison and Lumiere through Allen’s Annie Hall. Mast analyzes the different structures, techniques and values that have transformed cinematic comedy over time. He discusses the evolution of these techniques and how they appear and reappear in various pieces throughout silent and more modern film.
   Mast claims that while some film comics like Mel Brooks simply move from one parody to the next, Allen has transformed his comedic style from the purely parodic to a more personal, psychological and emotional film style. Allen’s films are more “French than American” in that they are “very conscious of themselves as conceptions for the film medium.”(313) According to Mast, Allen’s films are a mix between the “anarchic clown tradition” of the American style and the “ironic tradition”(313) of the French. Allen balances the line between “intellectual awareness, psychological astuteness” and the bizarre gag and parody. Mast argues that each of the main characters in Allen’s films, are essentially all the same because they display those same features no matter what situation they are thrown into.
   Recurring themes in Allen’s films include, neuroticism, sexual desire and self-discovery. Each of these themes get examined from a serious tone, but in films such as Love and Death, these serious ideas become the butt of many jokes. Mast continues to say that these topics continually develop in Allen’s later films as the director continues to explore himself. The psychoanalysis that Allen undertakes and his new understanding of himself provides for more humorous and profound ideas in his later films.

"The Causes of War and Peace" Ermanno Bencivenga

    The main work that Allen seizes his material from is Tolstoy’s War and Peace. The title alone, Love and Death, is a clear parody of this work, but the inspiration dives much deeper. Tolstoy’s novel examines the actual role of leaders in large events such as war and how much impact they could possibly have on specific occurrences. The role of speeches and words is touched upon by Tolstoy as well. Tolstoy’s novel focuses on ideas regarding free will and for what reasons men would go to fight a war behind a leader such as Napoleon.    Bencivenga also examines the use of Aristotelian syllogistic logic in the novel. He claims that “Tolstoy rejects the practical syllogism as an explanation of individual or collective action.”(6)
   Allen’s Love and Death intelligently uses many of the ideas from Tolstoy’s novel. The film is a clever parody that is able to incorporate obvious ideas such as the title and war with Napoleon. It explores further though to include Napoleon’s role in the war and the decisions at hand for the general. There is a scene at the beginning of the film in which Allen parodies the lack of free will Boris has in his decision to go to war along with the exhilaration of his brothers at the prospect of fighting.
   At many points in the film, Boris uses syllogisms to examine and parody life’s supposed truths. For example, “A. Socrates is a man. B. All men are mortal. C. All men are Socrates. That means all men are homosexuals.” This ridiculous logic mocking syllogisms comes right after a much more coherent moral predicament in which Boris weighs the idea of murder on his conscience. Allen manages to mock and satire different aspects of the writings of Tolstoy, even to the point of slapstick humor, but he combines the intelligence with comedy.

"Tolstoy and the Moral Instructions of Death" by Dennis Sansom

As Ivan Ilych (the title character of Tolstoy’s The Death of Ivan Ilych) nears the end of his own life he wonders, “What is the right thing?” After a life full of experience he realizes that he has not come close to understanding the meaning of life. Before Ivan neared his untimely death, he lived an ordinary life that “flowed pleasantly.” He never dealt with adversity and simply followed the path that was set out for him by his parents and society. “Tolstoy shows that Ivan’s life, though simple and ordinary, was truly terrible because he had no sense of the tragic dimension of life.”(8) The reader comes to understand that failure and inexplicable suffering happen whether a person has behaved rightly or not. As Ivan lies in bed slowly dying of his illness he has two visitors. His servant comes to visit him and teaches the reader that a common peasant is able to help Ivan even more than any doctor. His son also comes to visit him and portrays how no one should have to suffer such a painful, unwarranted death. This moment raises great questions about God’s will, destiny and justice.

As should be expected with a parody of Russian literature, Love and Death examines and satirizes many of these ideas. Many scenes in the film analyze theories on death and dying, but after the death of Boris the viewer gains a glimpse into what life and death have taught the hero. In The Death of Ivan Ilych the main character comes to the realization that he has learned nothing about morals or the true meaning of life. In contrast, the parody these ideas show a character, Boris, with seeming omniscience flaunts such tidbits of knowledge like, “there are worse things in life than death…I mean if you’ve ever spent an evening with an insurance salesman, you know exactly what I mean.” This film also provides a satire on the bedside drama that takes place in Tolstoy’s novels. As opposed to meaningful events taking place that enlighten the hero to life’s truths; Boris encounters ridiculous people from his past. One such person is Boris’s father who produces a package size parcel of land with a monopoly sized house on it and exclaims that he has finally built.

Love and Death written and directed by Woody Allen

Love and Death is a 1975 film written and directed by Woody Allen. The film is a satirical take on Russian epic novels. It takes place in Russia during the Napoleonic wars. Boris played by Allen himself, is a coward and pacifist scholar who is forced to enlist in the Russian army. The film chronicles Boris