Philosop 2235 Discussion Question 1 – on Lecture 2

In online discussions, your contributions will be assessed against the following factors:

– Your ability to relate any material from film clips seen on the course to ideas engaged with by the thinkers discussed in lectures and readings.

– Your incisiveness of argument, that is, your ability to: state the arguments proposed in each reading (and lecture),  propose revisions, or even create theses of your own.

– Friendliness, collegiality and respect! PLEASE contribute anything by way of impressions, likes and dislikes, preferences.

Once you’ve seen the clips for Lectures 1 (intro) and 2, I’m curious to hear what you think about the clips. Would you, in particular, as Balazs did, favour the close-up as one of the most important aspects of cinema?   

N.B. You are very welcome, by the way, to find and see the full movies of which they feature – this is however, not an expectation.   

Related: (Solution) Philosop 2235 Course Essay

Solution

Overall, I think the first two clips from lecture 1 using that type of animation made it a bit hard to focus on what the characters were actually saying. It was a bit distracting and unconventional which for the seriousness of the topics, didn’t really match up well in my opinion. I also found watching it a bit nauseating because of the constant movement. But, the dialogue was good and the colours and animation itself are impressive. The third clip reminds me of ASMR a bit, which I didn’t like for similar reasons as it made it harder to concentrate, especially because it’s in French. The stirring motion of the coffee reminded me of a scene in Taxi Driver where the main character was stirring water. Both clips are meant to make you feel a bit uneasy and that the future is not predictable, change is going to happen. 

The clips from lecture 2 were all older films ,,,..Please click on the Icon below to purchase the full answer at only $10

$10.00 – Purchase Checkout Added to cart