Analysis2-CarlyC

A:  

1. The subject of the Baraka trailer is the world, and life itself in all forms including animals, humans and their cultures. In the trailer, there isn’t much dialogue except at the very beginning and at the very end, so there is mostly just sound and images. The footage was very, clear and the shots started from a certain part of the world, and began to spread and become more diverse. At one point I believe they were playing scottish/highland music with tribes of Africa visuals. With the idea of life itself in all is forms I believe they were trying to make the point that we’re all very much alike. Some parts of the audio were increased at certain points to add suspense, or most feeling?
2. The subject of Waltz With Bashir is a man trying to recover his memory about his time in the war, what he did and who he killed. He uses photographs to try and trace his steps to recover his memory. This is very different from Baraka, because it’s all done with animation, not live footage, so the contrast, and colors are chosen specifically for a purpose. The colors in Baraka may be chosen for a reason, and increased slightly, but it’s not made completely by artists.

2.

—– Baraka:

+The beautiful vibrant pictures

+the sound of possibly scottish music with an african tribe dancing

+The sound of the guys/priests yelling, while they sit in a semi circle

——-Waltz with Bashir:

+The high contrast, yellow against black, red against black etc.

+Bashir saying that he might remember things that he doesn’t want to know about himself.

+the guy almost dancing with his gun, while he’s firing it

+a child with a grenade launcher, in an orchard, or garden of some sortW

B:

1:

• Part 1: Introduction of characters and Trading post

• Part 2:Nanook’s people are in trouble, he saves them, they all go hunting for walrus.
• Part 3: Winter, traveling across massive snow banks/hills, going along trap line, make igloo.
• Part 4: Surviving the storm, dogs die, END

2: At each point, it was a separation of major events. The beginning was introducing the characters and the Trading post. It illustrated how some of the modern technology is unknown to them. The second part was explaining how Nanook’s people are on the edge of starvation, and everything in this section has a feeling of urgency around it, the music helps with this feeling. When the men are trying to bring the walrus on to shore, the music is suspenseful, and it creates this loyalty to the Nanook people and a wish for them to succeed. In the third part, it’s during winter time and Nanook’s people are traveling trying to find food, this part has less urgency, and the transition is just the landscape images. The last part has urgency and sadness with the music and the footage. The family is trying to survive the storm, and while they’re in a deserted igloo, the dogs are outside. The footage shows the dogs, one after one being covered in snow, not moving, until there is only one left alive in the storm. This is an extremely sad part, which makes me wonder how valuable these dogs are to the Eskimo people, and if they are so important why aren’t they taken care of? The transitions were mostly text blocks explaining what the next part would be like, or explaining what’s happening.

3: The document doesn’t have a verbal narrator, but the text serves as narration, by explaining what’s happening in such a way that no dialogue is needed. Even though there isn’t dialogue and no voice over, the images and the text provided enough information, and the music provides feeling to the footage.

4: The footage is mostly pretty long, it just shows the family’s struggle to survive, it may cut to important images like the dogs growling because they’re hungry, or to the walruses in the water etc. The text that is before an image, or part of the footage just briefly explains what’s happening, and makes the viewer have to really pay attention to understand what’s happening. Even without the text, the long pieces of footage I believe would help a person understand, because what the Eskimo people are doing if human survival, hunting, building shelter etc. basic things we know and understand.

C:

1: The camera seems pretty stationary, the framing usually keep the people or the subject more in the middle of the screen. The quality of dark and light isn’t great, because of how long ago it was filmed, it’s hard to see some of the people’s faces, and distinguish features.

2. Most of the shots, showing characters moving around or conversing with one another are pretty long. This could be because there is no dialogue, so there is no need for shots going from person to person.

3. There is a straightforward narrative, it shows what they do in the summer, and then into the winter. The viewers get to see what the Eskimo do according to the situation, and it give them a personal look into their lives. When the text comes up, it’ll go directly to the corresponding footage after the text goes off the screen.

D:

1: I believe the filmmakers wanted to show how simply they live, how every choice they make it life or death, yet they seem extremely happy. I think he wanted to show that even though their life is completely different from others, they’re still very much alike. Nanook has a family that depends on him like other men around the world at this time. He works for a living (hunting) that supplies his family with what they need to survive, like other families in the world. The children still play, and the wife takes care of the children, similar roles to ones all over the world. I think he wanted to show the differences, but also how similar they are with other people, the culture and environments may be different but what people value is generally the same, family, and survival.

2: The term I would use are observer, because you never see the man filming Nanook and his family, you never see the camera crew, and he never asks them questions. He just observes them, and uses the camera to document what they do, then he adds a description to make what’s happening more clear. He never adds his own opinion, of exchanged an dialogue or anything with Nanook on in front of the camera.

3: I think the filmmaker was pretty good on ethical issues, he didn’t add his assumptions or bias very often. There was point where he showed something that might have other looking down at the Eskimo, which is when he is looking over the telegraph. Nanook has no idea what it is, or how it works, so it could be viewed as degrading how the filmmaker filmed his reaction.  

• Saved: A2