Screenshot from It’s a Wonderful Life (1946) depicting the significance of set design and the powerful use of physical placement in a scene. Also pictured: you settling in to read this post, having been tricked into reading what is essentially homework.
So, how does Review Roulette work?
Each week, I am going to watch a film that I want to watch and that I may or may not have seen before. After I pick the film, I will randomly generate an approach that will guide my viewing and perspective for the review of that film.
What do I mean by “approach”? This is where we get into methods of film criticism, how you watch and analyse a film. For some backstory, about a month ago, I gave a lecture at The University of Texas at Austin to undergrads introducing them to the foundations of academic film analysis, how to view and annotate a film, and some of the infinite types of research questions you can ask of a film. When I tweeted about this wonderful opportunity and the thrill of getting to teach film, a handful of people expressed interest in my doing the same in an accessible way online. So, I figured the best way to do that wouldn’t be a 90-minute lecture made public, but rather a breakdown of theories, methods, and approaches to increase our media literacy in general and share with you all my love for film analysis (and the nerdy good stuff that generally gets a pretentious cultural perception when in actuality it’s just technical terms (that are even more commonly misused).
So “approaches” are the ways we view films, the lenses you apply to give structure and critical perspective to your thoughts and review. Below I’ll list the approaches I’ll be randomly assigned each week, give a brief definition, and offer some quick example questions from that perspective about the classic film (and cornerstone of my dissertation) Frank Capra’s It’s a Wonderful Life (1946). My hope is that with this as a guide, we can share a technical language with consistent definitions and start kicking in those gates that were put up arbitrarily around public art and which discourage robust media literacy. I am going to alphabetise the list of approaches here, and it will be a lot of words, but if you make it to the end, I promise our film reviews will be much shorter!
Glossary of Approaches
Apparatus –
The apparatus approach is probably the most heavily theoretical one on this list, and it is just unfortunate that it is first alphabetically, but let’s break this down. In essence, the apparatus approach starts from the perspective that all films are ideological, by which I mean a creation of the cultural, social, political, economic, societal, temporal, etc. moment in which they are made, reflecting some semblance of reality from that moment.
This theory comes from Marxist theories on culture and structures of society. Many have weighed in here; my preference is for Louis Althusser. (Stick with me.) Althusser outlines something called the Ideological State Apparatus (as well as the Repressive State Apparatus (think police, army, National Guard in the US, the structures or organisations in society that uphold the laws of the ruling power)). The Ideological State Apparatus is the network of other structures in society that teach individuals how to be individuals as well as citizens and therefore a collective nation. These ideological structures, then, include but are not limited to education (especially state-run), organised religions, news media, and entertainment media, the places where students, congregants, or viewers develop their perspectives as both individuals and members of a group. So we have this idea of the Ideological State Apparatus as cultural and civic conveyors, and we also have this understanding of society as led by the most powerful group, the “State” (which, for all intents and purposes, Althusser and I believe we should view as the most powerful group and not necessarily solely the government (because we live in a corporatist society in which the billionaires have the power to, on a whim, disrupt a massive military operation and the government has no power to stop them (but I digress))).
(I promise this is the longest one and the rest are not like this).
Where the apparatus film approach comes in is we take this idea that cinema (as entertainment media) and Hollywood (as one of the largest cultural sectors in not only the US, but also the world) are powerful creators and purveyors of ideology. Through films, our identity as Americans, our prevailing views on cultural topics, our competing values, our struggles, our differences, our faults and successes and everything in between are portrayed through artistic media, never uniform and never singular, but always plural, always in conversation with one another and always reflecting some aspect of our very varied society. So, as film critics, we take this given starting place that films are ideological and that the audience are members of the reality in which these films were made, and we look at what structures in society our film is commenting on, what about the apparatuses of society is being critiqued or questioned or challenged or praised. We examine the film’s portrayal of the aspects of society, that the audience understands as normal, dominant ideas and structures of that society, and we think about what the intent behind that portrayal was on screen.
What stance does It’s a Wonderful Life take on capitalism? How does the film engage prevailing attitudes towards the banking system? Why was the FBI concerned about It’s a Wonderful Life as potentially subversive communist ideology, and are these claims supported by the film?
Auteur –
This approach is concerned with the director’s influence on the film. All film scholars and enthusiasts know that it takes hundreds of hands and minds to make, market, and view a film, so why do we boil it down to the director so frequently? Some people have different opinions, but throughout Hollywood history, there have always been stand-out directors who exerted signature styles over their films and worked with portrayals of certain tropes, perspectives, themes, and actors, none more distinctively than in the New Hollywood era of the 1960s through the budding Blockbuster era of the 70s with your Spielbergs, Lucases, and Scorseses. We very much have some stand outs now as well with types including Wes Anderson, Christopher Nolan, and Greta Gerwig who have such distinctive styles and overwhelming hallmarks stamped on their films to quickly identify it as their own.
So, to take an Auteur approach to film is to consider how this film was influenced by the director as the ultimate “author” of the film, the person whose name is above the title (Capra reference for my 30s/40s nerds) and who gets all the fame and blame after reviews.
How does It’s a Wonderful Life fit into the other works of Capra? How might his life as an Italian-American immigrant influence the portrayal of the promises of the American Dream? Does Capra’s recent military service factor into the making of this film?
Dualist –
A dualist approach considers dichotomies in a film that can be reflective of opposites in reality, society, or human nature. These dichotomies are contrasting themes that might include but are not limited to good vs. evil, light vs. dark, urban vs. rural, and wealth vs. poverty.
What is the dichotomy between George (the lovable hero and small-town banker) and Mr. Potter (the miserly, monopolising banker who owns half the town)? Does this personal relationship between the two men offer a larger critique on the structures and morals of financial systems in our own world?
Formalist –
Formalist approaches analyse the technical composition of a film. Technical aspects are also called the cinematography of a film, or the art of making a motion picture and capturing a story on film. Cinematography includes the shot composition (how does the scene look, what were the intentions of the set design, what is the lighting doing in this scene?) as well as the score (music), use of colour, and editing of the film. Analysing the film as a technical achievement looks heavily at the production of the film while also considering the story and the form the film takes in portraying the film.
How is the set design of Mr. Potter’s office a reflection of his character and the power dynamics he exploits to maintain control? How does Capra use close-up shots to convey intense emotions within the film? How (in the colour version) do the colours of characters’ outfits convey their ambition and wealth statuses?
Genre –
· The generic approach looks at the wider cohort of films that share storytelling characteristics, tropes, and motifs. Some popular genres including musicals, Westerns, film noir, action, and rom-coms. The linking factors of genre can be varied, manipulated, purely formulaic, tangential, or stereotypical of the category a film is classified as. We can look at how a film fits in with the genre it claims to be, or we can subvert that and argue a film is a different (or multiple) genre(s) from the stated or inferred genre from the marketing. (Genre, when you really start breaking it down, is a very loose category of films that we rely on to typify and organise our discussions about, as well as our expectations for, films with vague or explicit connections between one another. However, it is also a very helpful way of exploring the different approaches within a prescribed genre and how films can express themselves individually while belonging to a larger cohort).
How does It’s a Wonderful Life live up to its advertising as a rom-com? In what ways does this film fit into the wider corpus of populist cinema? What are the generic touchstones within this film that signal it is a populist film?
Historical –
Viewing a film historically can be one of two things (or both if you want!).
1. Contemporary Historical: In the first instance around the production of the film, a historical approach could situate the film in the contemporary historyof its making and release. This approach looks at the cultural, social, political, etc. circumstances surrounding the film when it was made.
How does It’s a Wonderful Life speak to, reflect, or inform on the cultural moment of the immediate post-war period? Are the financial concerns expressed in the film relative to the realities of small-town American life? Is there a contemporary history of mental health that parallels the events of the film?
2. Contextual History: The second option for historical viewing is contextual to any historical content portrayed in the film. This approach is concerned with how someone at the time of making the film viewed that historical event. We can view this as the film’s historiographical contribution (for my history nerds – I can expand if wanted!).
How does It’s a Wonderful Life portray the Great Depression in small-town America? How is WWII presented and what roles in the war effort do the characters play?
Ideological –
Ideological approaches to film are varied and many. This vague category is an umbrella for a number of ideological angles from which we can view a film and is separate from the Apparatus approach above. While Apparatus looks at the structures of society and the audience’s connection with those structures, the ideological category here requires a specific perspective be adopted when viewing the film such as via disability, feminist, Marxist, queer, and racial & ethnic lenses. For the purposes of Review Roulette, I am going to limit it to these five (for now).
1. Disability – Viewing a film with a disability theory in mind prompts you to think about the accessibility within the film and any commentaries on health, physical and mental abilities, and physical spaces within the film from an accessibility standpoint. (Disclaimer: I’m low-key making this one up, because I haven’t ever seen it categorised as an ideological approach for film, BUT I want to start thinking more about this in life and film and I think we all should, so it’s going on the list.)
How are Mr. Potter’s wheelchair, and comments from other characters about it, used to influence his character? How does Mr. Potter use the chair and his disability to his advantage? How is Uncle Billy’s mental health portrayed in the film? How is George’s mental health portrayed in the film?
2. Feminist – A feminist reading will examine the gender dynamics within the film, particularly around the portrayal and treatment of women-presenting or -coded characters.
How are Mary and Violet portrayed in the film as competing types of women? How and why is Violet’s implicit sexualisation and implied promiscuity used to mar her character? Can Mary be read as the true hero of the film? (Yes.)
3. Marxist – As mentioned above under Apparatus, that too is rooted in Marxist theory concerning the reflections of societal structures on film and in connection to the audience. Applying an ideological Marxist approach is thinking about ideas of class and wealth and other social (as in class-tangential) constructs of society amid the plot and characters and filmed world.
What is the financial disparity between Pottersville and Bedford Falls, and further, what are the moral implications of the town’s fiscal transformation? How are the wealthier characters portrayed similarly or differently from the those less fortunate? Why is George’s rant about “a couple-a decent rooms and a bath” such a god damn banger? (Look it up if you don’t know what I’m talking about).
4. Queer – While queer theory can of course be used to look at LGBTQIA+ identities in film, it is also a much wider category of anything that is outside of heteronormativity and the structures of society inherent to that. What I mean by that is anything that is perceived as breaking or outside of the predominant ways of interacting with society, other individuals, and the natural world.
How is George’s reluctance to get married and hesitancy to settle down portrayed in the film? Is George a queer character throughout the entirety of the film for these views, or does he assimilate into a normative lifestyle? How is Mr. Potter’s lack of a family (and, crucially, children) depicted in the film? How do the environmental changes between Bedford Falls and Pottersville insinuate desired relationships with the natural world?
5. Racial & Ethnic – Viewing a film through this lens prompts analysis of the race-based structures within a film as well as the relationships between different ethnic groups. This approach in Review Roulette will mostly be used to analyse how and why white tends to be the default race in Hollywood films, especially in the 20th century, and how that idea is toxically implicit in these films.
How is Annie, the Baileys’ maid, portrayed in this film as the only black person? What is Annie’s relationship to the white characters in the film? How is Mr. Potter’s xenophobia direct and indirect in the film and what does this say in opposition to George’s inclusivity? What is the film saying by portraying the archetypical American (George) and his family as lower-middle class white people?
Structuralist –
We’re not doing structuralist here because I am not a post-modernist, but I wanted to include it here specifically to say this: if anyone ever tells you that they are taking a structuralist approach to a film, I want you to ask them exactly what that means. Do not stop asking for them to clarify until they give you a crystal-clear answer. I have never received one.
My best summary of a structuralist approach is that it is an umbrella category for the forms of storytelling (but different from formalist!). Within the structuralist category, you can find genre studies, but the actual function of the structuralist approach is to analyse the conventions of storytelling without focusing on the story; looking at the film’s structural language without looking at what is being said; looking at the compilation of shots and sequences as a mode of conveying emotion and plot development and human nature without concerning oneself with the emotion or plot or human in question. It is not my preferred approach by far and I will not be using it in Review Roulette, but if this sounds interesting to you, please do seek out more information on it!
For a laugh: How is the camera’s slow progression towards George’s face in the whole sequence of Pottersville an indication of his gradual acceptance of his mistake and subsequent regret? What is the significance of the framing of the film on angelic voices in the stars (read: Heavens) and how does this framing prompt a discussion about faith and mental health for a Christian viewer?
So, to recap this nearly 3000-word post (you’re a trooper for carrying through), our categories to be randomised are:
Apparatus
Auteur
Dualist
Formalist
Genre
Contemporary Historical
Contextual History
Disability
Feminist
Marxist
Queer
Race/Ethnic
I will pick a film I’m feeling, then randomise, get an approach, and watch the film with that approach in mind, give it a think, a bit of rumination for a few days and then write and post my review (probably on Thursdays? Late Wednesday night? If there are preferences please let me know! (Time is a flat circle)). Please also feel free to refer back to this post as and when for definitions and refreshers.
I will see you all here next week for our first film review! And if you feel so inclined, please share this post or tell a friend!
An excellent overview of the various film critiques looking forward to seeing the films you choose.
Thank you so much! I hope you enjoy the reviews!
Thank you so much for reading and subscribing!