Redesigning an intro to film class (high school)

[essrog]

I guess it's time for my yearly plea to the CF.org community to help with my curriculum design. Here's the situation: next year, new English Language Arts standards (the common core standards) take effect. I'll need to alter the intro to film class I teach so that it includes literature (including Shakespeare). It's a semester-long class, so I imagine I'll need to include at least one novel and one Shakespeare play, along with some short stories (we're in the midst of figuring all this out as a department). Right now the class starts with a few weeks where we focus exclusively on the language of film (watching film clips that illustrate concepts of cinematography, editing, etc.). Then we move on to genres like westerns, romantic comedy and film noir. The class is a senior elective (kids can choose to take a world literature course -- standard or AP -- or a variety of other electives like public speaking, creative writing, etc. In other words, the typical student in my class is a male, reluctant reader).

I've been trying to figure out how to work literature into the course without making it seem forced; I have no interest, for example, in doing something like a page-to-screen class where we focus on adaptations. So here's what I'm thinking, and I want you guys to tell me if you think this is a bad idea: what about a crime literature/film noir/neo-noir class? We'd still do the language of film stuff at the beginning, but after that we'd move on to focus on this one genre (or style, or whatever). Some ideas I had were reading novels by Hammett and Chandler, then watching filmed adaptations/reworkings of their writing (e.g., Red Harvest -->Maltese Falcon -->Miller's Crossing, The Big Sleep -->Murder, My Sweet -->The Long Goodbye -->The Big Lebowski. For Shakespeare, I came across some possibilities that I haven't seen, including A Double Life and Strange Illusion, and some I have seen, like The Bad Sleep Well, that could work. It also seems like a good way to include female writers (Patricia Highsmith), female directors (Ida Lupino's The Hitchhiker and Debra Granik's Winter's Bone, as well as black writers (Walter Mosley) and black directors (Carl Franklin's version of Mosley's Devil in a Blue Dress).

So what do you guys think? I really like the chances of this approach hitting my target audience while still including other points of view, but is it just too esoteric for a class that's also supposed to serve as an intro to film? Thanks in advance for your feedback.

[carax09]

You might want to work The Glass Key into it, as it's clearly a major influence on Miller's Crossing.

[matrixschmatrix]

It might be interesting to hop genres in looking where the threads lead- so go from Red Harvest to Yojimbo to Fistful of Dollars, maybe, so that you can see which elements are actually part of the generic concerns and which are more specific to the story itself.

You could perhaps transition into Shakespeare by looking at the concept of adapting a play, as it might be enlightening to contrast the ideas of mise-en-scene and direction as they play out on stage vs in the cinema- and you could show some of the early, poorly adapted Shakespeare works as examples of failures to adapt. Olivier's Henry V would be interesting there, as it consciously shifts between a few different levels of theatricality- and you could also perhaps include something like Vanya on 42nd, both as literature and as an unusual approach to adapting for the screen. (I would also recommend Julie Taymore's Titus, as a very successful screen adaptation of a not entirely successful play.)

[Lemmy Caution]

One thing which might be quite interesting is to have them read a screenplay(s).
(Quite a lot of them are available on these interwebs)
It's the most natural way to combine writing and film.
And I'd assume none of them have ever read or looked at a screenplay before, so I think it would be interesting and enlightening for them. Open their wee little minds some.
Er, plus they're pretty easy to read.
Could allow for discussion of how to construct scenes, scene transitions, character introduction, lots of other elements of film.
Also, interesting when early drafts differ from the actual film and could lead to a discussion of the changes made.

[Mr Sausage]

A good way to look at it is to pair off films and books that tackle a common theme or work through similar philosophical ideas. The benefit here is that you can build discussion around how the particular work uses its particular medium to present its ideas, in contradistinction to the example from the other medium. This forces your students to become sensitive to the actual processes of each medium while also honing their analytical and interpretive skills through working with larger thematic concepts.

[essrog]

A good way to look at it is to pair off films and books that tackle a common theme or work through similar philosophical ideas. The benefit here is that you can build discussion around how the particular work uses its particular medium to present its ideas, in contradistinction to the example from the other medium. This forces your students to become sensitive to the actual processes of each medium while also honing their analytical and interpretive skills through working with larger thematic concepts.

Well-said. I definitely try to do this when teaching literature courses (pairing Gatsby with There Will Be Blood, Frankenstein with Blade Runner, etc.). Do you still see this approach working here -- sticking with one basic genre -- or do you think I need to broaden the scope?

[Mr Sausage]

A good way to look at it is to pair off films and books that tackle a common theme or work through similar philosophical ideas. The benefit here is that you can build discussion around how the particular work uses its particular medium to present its ideas, in contradistinction to the example from the other medium. This forces your students to become sensitive to the actual processes of each medium while also honing their analytical and interpretive skills through working with larger thematic concepts.

Well-said. I definitely try to do this when teaching literature courses (pairing Gatsby with There Will Be Blood, Frankenstein with Blade Runner, etc.). Do you still see this approach working here -- sticking with one basic genre -- or do you think I need to broaden the scope?

I would avoid pairing movies and books from the same genre. The repetition of tropes, style, and tone will muddy things unnecessarily. Stick with one genre of film, but pair the movies with a wider range of literature that is complementary in terms of themes but uses a different mode of story-telling. For instance, if you're doing noir, it's more rewarding to pair something like Act of Violence with Macbeth than it is to pair up a Cain or Hammet novel with Out of the Past. If the works are too overtly similar then it becomes all the more difficult for the kids to parse what makes each one unique, or they'll simply use one as a crutch for the other, if not outright fail to see how film language works differently from literary language.

[Adam]

It might be interesting to hop genres in looking where the threads lead- so go from Red Harvest to Yojimbo to Fistful of Dollars, maybe, so that you can see which elements are actually part of the generic concerns and which are more specific to the story itself.

Just what I was going to say. And also include the Hollywood versions - including the one with Bruce Willis, Last Man Standing. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0116830/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; That really allows one to look at cultural references and contrasts.

Once upon a time there was a TV mini-series based on Hammett's The Dain Curse. The books itself divides nicely into three parts. It was one of the real early mini-series. I've never seen it, nor ever seen it for sale. Just read about it somewhere.

I once took a class on adaptation and film form. Started with Big Sleep, book & film. The Shining. Heck, I can't remember most - it's been too long. But the Kubrick adaptations are pretty interesting in the way he adapted them, how he adjusted characters, left in & out various plots, the themes he chose to stress: 2001, The Shining, Clockwork Orange, Lolita. Also how he converted Michael's Herr's Dispatches into Full Metal Jacket, and Arthur Schnitzler's 1926 novella Traumnovelle (Dream Story) into Eyes Wide Shut.

[Jack Phillips]

But the Kubrick adaptations are pretty interesting in teh way he adapted them, how he adjusted characters, left in & out various plots, the themes he chose to stress: 2001, The Shining, Clockwork Orange, Lolita. Also how he converted Michael's Herr's Dispatches into Full Metal Jacket, and the short story by (hell, another blank, easy to look up) into Eyes Wide Shut.

I've always thought Kubrick's transformation of Barry Lyndon makes an interesting case in point. The original novel is told from Barry's p.o.v. and Barry, being an unreliable narrator, "unintentionally" provides a lot of humor in the telling. Kubrick, needless to say, changes the tone of the material completely. He also adds a final duel that was not in Thackeray--reinforcing a motif that he established in the film's first scene.

[beamish13]

Have you considered utilizing Robert Cormier's THE CHOCOLATE WAR and Keith Gordon's excellent 1988 film of it? It would probably stimulate some very interesting conversations about preserving an author's intentions when adapting a work.

[zedz]

You could perhaps transition into Shakespeare by looking at the concept of adapting a play, as it might be enlightening to contrast the ideas of mise-en-scene and direction as they play out on stage vs in the cinema- and you could show some of the early, poorly adapted Shakespeare works as examples of failures to adapt. Olivier's Henry V would be interesting there, as it consciously shifts between a few different levels of theatricality. . .

Olivier's Henry V has always seemed to me like an eminently teachable film, since it's all about adaptation, while also being a relatively straightforward account of the text. Plus you've got easy access to some other important, easy-to-grasp issues:
- functions of adaptation / 'updating', since Henry V is also very much a WWII film
- shifting standards of 'realism' vs. artificiality / theatricality. So many viewers today apply an unthinking presentism to old films, and this is one film where that kind of shift in conceptions of verisimilitude are intenalized and made visible.
- the resilience of Shakespeare. This film already demonstrates several different approaches to a single text, and this discussion can easily be augmented by selected clips from a diverse array of adaptations that demonstrate how many different inflections can be given to the 'same' material (Hamlet seems the obvious choice, from Asta Nielsen in drag to Olivier to Kurosawa to Kosintsev to Kaurismaki to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead)

[matrixschmatrix]

Hamlet would give you an excuse to watch an MST in class, too.

[domino harvey]

We're on a gradual 25-50-75 Common Core creep where I teach, and while it's a good idea in theory, I teach seniors in one of the most famously under-performing districts in the nation and these kids just aren't ready. But in ten years we might be somewhere (as will I, as in somewhere the fuck else). I am surprised your admins are making even elective courses accountable, but such is the wonder of public education. Since Common Core is so reliant on writing, why not bring in literature about film and how viewers respond? Percy's the Moviegoer or Wright's Black Boy come to mind as high-interest titles that might be worth a look. I will say that I did a huge noir unit last year (the results of which you can find somewhere in the Noir List Project thread) and it was very well-received by my seniors, but you probably know your kids and what they'll respond to better than anyone else.

[TMDaines]

I'm curious: if this is an "Intro to Film" class, why do you not have at least one silent film and why is everything English language? Maybe I've misread this thread and you've still got many more films to select (and may have in fact already chosen films from these categories). It's startling how many people have never seen a proper feature-length silent film (even when they're starting a Weimar module here at my university).

[duck duck]

I think it depends on what school you are teaching at, many times people take intro to film classes because they know they can just watch movies and miss classes if they rent the film, as to if you show foreign or silent features. I have found that people would rather watch a Chaplin 2 reel than listen to a lecture. If you want to put in a silent I would suggest "The Emigrant" because most people are at least aware of Chaplin's existence as appose to showing "Intolerance" and talking about how this director invented x,x,x, & y techniques..

Also, don't show Citizen Kane... Everyone I have ever meet that has seen it in an intro class thinks it is terrible.

[essrog]

I am surprised your admins are making even elective courses accountable, but such is the wonder of public education.

I guess "elective" isn't quite the right term. The two film classes I teach, along with the other classes I mentioned, all fulfill the English requirement for seniors, so it actually makes sense that they're held accountable -- it's just that the common core standards seem designed as a one-size-fits-all model, so some of the standards are awkward fits for some (read: non-literature-based) classes.

I will say that I did a huge noir unit last year (the results of which you can find somewhere in the Noir List Project thread) and it was very well-received by my seniors, but you probably know your kids and what they'll respond to better than anyone else.

I did see that, and admired your approach -- although we teach in vastly different worlds (I teach in a pretty well-to-do suburb), I think something similar could work for me. If you're passionate and knowledgable about the subject, it's pretty cool what you can get kids to buy into.

I'm curious: if this is an "Intro to Film" class, why do you not have at least one silent film and why is everything English language? Maybe I've misread this thread and you've still got many more films to select (and may have in fact already chosen films from these categories).

Assuming I stick with the noir/crime movie idea, I'm definitely including some Melville and some Suzuki, or maybe something else from the Nikkatsu noir set. Right now, I teach two foreign language films (The Battle of Algiers and M) with pretty good results. As for silents, I plead guilty. Again, if I stick with noir, there are some obvious opportunities with Expressionist films that I'll definitely consider showing to help illustrate the origins of noir.

Thanks to everyone for their suggestions so far -- they've been thought-provoking. Keep 'em coming as long as you're interested.

[Noiradelic]

As far as teaching hardboiled/noir fiction, I think Red Harvest is a great choice, because it's the first novel written in the hardboiled style. You might want to also consider The Postman Always Rings Twice also, as it's the first non-detective noir novel. It also has a plot that's been recycled endlessly, practically creating a new story subgenre. Doesn't hurt that both are short, accessible books too. The Double Indemnity>Body Heat film lineage is interesting too, because of how the latter's success sparked the neo-noir cycle of the eighties and nineties.

[stroszeck]

Just wanted to put my .02 cents in here, but if you are in fact putting together a curriculum for modern high school students, some of those titles, the noirs especially, may not play too well. Kids these days unfortunately have the attention spans of gnats and it would do you well to sprinkle some newer films in there for posterity so you don't just lose them right off the bat. Something to think about. I once had a film class which consisted mostly of Hitchcock films (back in college), and the only film that played well to the crowd of about 300 people was Psycho. The endings of Rear Window (where James Stewart falls out the window) and even Vertigo had the entire audience laughing out loud. Kids these days...

[Brian C]

The endings of Rear Window (where James Stewart falls out the window) and even Vertigo had the entire audience laughing out loud. Kids these days...

Is this really a problem, though? I'm not an educator, but by coincidence I just saw Rear Window recently, which was screened as part of a college class. Yes, there was laughter at the end, but my impression was that the movie was still playing well and holding people's attention. Granted, these were art-school students with members of the general public mixed in, but I had a similar experience when I saw it in a general film studies class that I was taking in the mid-90s.

What I mean is, people can laugh at the old special effects - and let's face it, by today's standards they do look silly - and still be able to appreciate the movie.

[essrog]

The endings of Rear Window (where James Stewart falls out the window) and even Vertigo had the entire audience laughing out loud. Kids these days...

Is this really a problem, though? I'm not an educator, but by coincidence I just saw Rear Window recently, which was screened as part of a college class. Yes, there was laughter at the end, but my impression was that the movie was still playing well and holding people's attention. Granted, these were art-school students with members of the general public mixed in, but I had a similar experience when I saw it in a general film studies class that I was taking in the mid-90s.

What I mean is, people can laugh at the old special effects - and let's face it, by today's standards they do look silly - and still be able to appreciate the movie.

This. I show Rear Window in my other film class, and kids laugh, but not long before that at least one of them literally gasps when Thorwald looks right at Jeff (and them). I've found that I need to strike a balance in film selection between not pandering to them and not pushing so far that they tune out. For example, in my Altman unit in the other class, I show The Long Goodbye (which they love) and The Player (which they like) -- then I show them Nashville (which they hate). We still have fairly productive discussions about it, but if it was the third movie in a row they hated, I probably wouldn't get anything out of them.

Of course, this is only me -- there are a thousand different approaches for every aspect of teaching, and no one has a monopoly on the best way to do anything.

[duck duck]

It's not Noir but something for an adaption that would probably go over well is
Heart of Darkness and Apocalypse Now. I read the book after seeing the film
many times and was really surprised that Denis Hopper's character is actually
written that way so it wasn't just coked up and crazy.
I took a class where we did All the King's Men (not successful) and The Postman
Always Rings Twice. We all wanted to know where the fucking postman was...
Some of the most interesting things came from adaptations of short stories and
what themes are continued and why and what you would do differently.

[Kristenastewart]

I’ve been thinking over the last couple of days about how I might be able to contribute to this month’s Teaching Carnival. Like Mel, I think George has asked some excellent questions, and because I’ve just started a new teaching gig here at Fayetteville State, I’m most interested right now in thinking about what I’ll be doing differently this year. I addressed this question in passing a few weeks ago when I discussed my plans for my freshman composition classes this fall, but I haven’t really discussed my other course, Introduction to Film and Visual Literacy, in much detail.

Right now, I’m teaching the course as a variant of the Introduction to Film courses that I’ve taught at Purdue, Illinois, and Georgia Tech. Like an Introduction to literature course, the intro High School Diploma requires a lot of juggling, introducing students to the formal language of film study (close-up, low-key lighting), to film genres and histories, and to the basics of film theory (the male gaze, etc). And because I’m interested in how social and technological forces affect our experience of moviegoing, I’ve decided to teach the Intro course using Timothy Corrigan and Patricia White’s The Film Experience, but in general, like Chris at Dr. Mabuse, I’ve been thinking about what the Introduction to Film texts and courses–including some specific classroom practices–say about our discipline, and I’ve been specifically trying to address this question as it relates to my position withing Fayetteville State’s student population.