Most recent public comments by Baruch Student https://nowcomment.com/users/23947 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640989 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640989 Because she is already dead I am confused by the title of the novel. Why is it called As I Lay Dying if Ms Bundren is already dead. While she was laying while dying her son built a coffin outside her window as she watched. Its such dark humor. Why is the entire novel titled after one or two chapters? Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:20 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640988 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640988 Would you call each chapter a monologue? Or a narrative? or a perspective? This confuses me. I always understood monologues to be spoken thoughts rather than internal thoughts. The chapters in the book are not spoken but rather the follow characters throughout the story and occasionally explain how theyre feeling. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640987 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640987 Why wouldn't they make a movie like Ozu? If Citizen Kane was the only exception and it was successful and very well known why wouldn't they make films similar to them? Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640986 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640986 I agree with Luke. I do not think that Franco was trying to make a blockbuster. He was trying to accurately adapt Faulkner's work into film using gimmicks that Faulkner used in his novels such as messing with time or multi perspectives. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640985 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640985 Did Franco experiment with snapshots of different characters perspective first before he decided on the split screen. I find that in movies when there is two things happening at the same time, when the filmmakers cut from character to character in the different scenes its easier for me to catch all the details rather than a split screen. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640984 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640984 Not always. I don't think solely relying on the facial and physical body movements can tell the audience exactly what the character is thinking. I agree with Luke that the novel did a much better job in regard to expression. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640983 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640983 The book did not have many monologues is this the movies way of converting the narration so that the audience of the film can understand what is happening ? Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640982 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640982 I agree with you on certain points but I do think that the movie can turn things that are implicit into things that are explicit. While reading the book I did not understand that there was a sexual relationship between the two characters until much later in the book. The movie however, allows viewers to understand this much earlier in the book. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640979 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56433?scroll_to=640979 I disagree I did not enjoy the split screen. Although I did understand the reasoning for having it. It would be close to impossible to display everything that is going on due to the novels chapters each being from someone else perspective. But I felt like it was hard to pay attention to multiple things happening at the same time in regard to the split screen. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617837 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617837 The exposition of Reivers and the story of Intruder in the Dust are set in southern towns. The towns have a lot of similarities. Both have grit and grime, and farm land not to far away. Both films try to portray as accurately as possible life in a small town in the south. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617833 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617833 The novel is called mordant because it brings up the topic of racism. The novel blatantly points out the "roles" of black people vs. white people. Often Lucas is told “if you’d only behave like a black man” however he refuses and the novel exemplifies what happens when people do not play their part in that society at the time. Everyone always wants things to be perfect and in their places so the film and the novel show what happens when it is not, so it made audiences uncomfortable. Therefore they called it mordant. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:19 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617830 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617830 I think that Chick is conflicted. He realizes later on that Lucus saved his life and that he should be greatful to him but his is giving into the mob-mentality of the community around him. The community and his family teaches him to believe that white is power, so even though he is greatful to Lucus he tries to fit into the mob by making him pick the coins off the ground. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617829 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617829 I think the film was expected to be a failure because it has a strong message about something that would probably make people of that time uncomfortable. They were not ready for just a strong message about racism. Even today there are many people who are not ready to deal with a strong message about racism. I think that people who read books especially if they read a lot of books develop a different perspective of the world, compared to those who exclusively watch just the popular movies. Those who read the book were ready for the strong message about racism but those who went to see the film were hoping for an escape from their reality rather than a reality check. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617828 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617828 Often times people are "star-struck" by the idea of Hollywood. If someone from Hollywood said they would be in a film they would not pass the opportunity because they want to be seen on the big screen. That is why they were not concerned with who they would be or what they would portray in the film but rather just cared about being in it. Every person craves to be known or acknowledged what better way to be known or acknowledged than being on a big screen in front of the entire country? This speaks volumes about American culture. People can do crazy things to try to be on TV now-adays and they don't care what they do to get their minute of screentime. This is something I dont think has changed very much or will change. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617827 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617827 A message picture is a film that tries to teach the audience about an issue or idea that is often overlooked or not spoken about. The message of the picture is racism and its affects on not only the black people, but the rest of the community. The community in the picture has a mob-mentality and does not sway their opinion and the young boy in the film has to make the conscious choice to get against his community, the things he has learned, and the way he is taught to act and treat others. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617808 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56418?scroll_to=617808 Intruder in the Dust is the best movie because of the use of the actual people in the south. Using locals makes the movie feel more authentic even though their parts were voiced over and they were just there to show face and allow the movie to be filmed on location they really contribute to the film. Furthermore, the story in this movie is timeless. As we mentioned in class Faulkner had an understanding of the world and the history of the US. Although this film and novel are only telling one story it is actually telling the story of the racism and is pointing out issues that we still face today. Its incredible. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617804 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617804 Hudson's performance adds to the film. Compared to the novel where the reporter is a drunk unnamed man fascinated by the lifestyle of the pilots. Hudson's part gives the audience a character they hope for. Hudson creates understanding of Lavern Jack and Roger and their strange mother father father relationship. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617803 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617803 Faulkner is very descriptive throughout the novel. Through his complex language he describes the urges of alcoholism, refers to death, the boredom associated with the feeling of people misplaced or lost, and sexuality. All of which give the novel a very cinematic feeling because rather than reading the book you feel the book, the emotions and see exactly what he is describing. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617800 Faulkner's novel is very descriptive, erotic, and hard to understand. The reporter is unnamed and an alcoholic. Tarnished Angels probably challenged the directors because a lot of the characters are not people the audience would root for. The director had to create a character that the audience would actually relate to and want to succeed that is why they gave him a name as well as a romantic story line omitting a lot of the vulgarities of the novel. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617799 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617799 The reporter has a name in the movie but not the book because the reporter acts as a narrator or ones thought process/consciousness while observing something. In almost all books the narrator stays unnamed. Someone is always telling the story in books but they are not frequently an actually character in the story. I think Faulkner was playing with the idea of a traditional narrator to make reading the story more interesting. Also, since he is a writer himself he has the excuse of writing what he does know, rather than trying to write what he doesn't know; aviation. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617798 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617798 Hawk's insistence on no flashbacks could be the reason why in Pylon Faulkner's characters do not seem to have a past at all and their story lines only tend to focus on the present. Ontop of the no flashbacks rules the novel might have been affected because of the topic. I think that maybe the topic of the novel; Faulkner does not develop the past of the characters as much as he normally does. In class we often discuss that the reason Faulkner writes about the south so much is because he is stuck on the idea of writing what you know. Since he never actually flew, or rather never actually fought in a war and returned he does not know how to accurately give the characters more depth using their past. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617796 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56428?scroll_to=617796 I think that Faulkner called the film honest because although a lot of the features from the story in Pylon are missing Douglas Sirk embodies the meaning of Pylon that Faulkner was trying to get across. There was an emphasis on fighters from WWII feeling like displaced people, wandering without a home and not knowing where they belong. The actual circular and repetitive flight around the pylons in the air races that the old pilots now did in New Orleans show off repetitive wandering of those who feel like they do not belong. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56417?scroll_to=617791 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56417?scroll_to=617791 The film develops around Marlowe because it is often hard to understand why someone that kills people can be sweet. It makes his character feel hypocritical or maybe even insane like the Joker. Therefore to avoid having Marlowe feel contradicting and develop the mystery further the film develops around Marlowe and explains through his actions how he can be sweet but also murderous. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56417?scroll_to=617788 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56417?scroll_to=617788 I agree I think the Faulkner was told not to do flashbacks in order to give the characters more time to develop. This relies heavily on mystery so if Faulkner just outright explained each character using flashbacks it would take away from the ambiguous feeling surrounding the characters in the story. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56417?scroll_to=617787 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56417?scroll_to=617787 Bogart's appeal is due to his cynicism as well as his ability to reject a women that clearly wants him. Unfortunate but true women tend to be more attracted to men that do not want them, so for women in the audience to see Bogart engaging conversations layered in subtext and still wanting to walk away makes him all the more appealing. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56417?scroll_to=617785 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56417?scroll_to=617785 The film is so popular because it finds a way around the rules. Typically in stories that involve mysteries there is an unsaid rule that the mystery must be solved. Also the new rules and regulations on films Hollywood produced sex could not be outright spoken about on screen and other things had regulation placed upon them. Therefore the film broke two rules, one unspoken and the other which was directly given. There is never a result from the investigation the audience is drawn to the story because until the end they do not know that there will be no result. Ontop of that Geiger as a book store clerk that locks the door and drinks with Marlowe, and later talks with double meaning about horse racing/sex at a restaurant is daring and defiantly draws the audience in. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56417?scroll_to=617781 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56417?scroll_to=617781 Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56416?scroll_to=617780 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56416?scroll_to=617780 Often times as we have seen in movies the dialogue has a second meaning. While watching the movie the dialogue Faulkner wrote has a second meaning either to get around the rules that Hollywood put in place, or to give the story line more depth. Its very different than Hemingway, although he wrote very poetically and the dialogue between characters often was beautiful Hemingway tends to sit to short sentences. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56416?scroll_to=617779 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56416?scroll_to=617779 Things that are often associated with film noir are dark, cynical, daring, dangerous, and pessimistic to name a few. Dangerous activity such as crime and being framed is associated with film noir also, that is why I think the costume design directly displays the intent of the characters and embodies the state of mind on Harry as well as Marie. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56416?scroll_to=617777 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56416?scroll_to=617777 Cinematography can invoke emotions because the producer puts you in the perspective of the character. For example when an angle they film a certain scene makes you feel like you're actually there with the character you feel like more of a part of a story than just a viewer. For example if a character smiles at the camera when a door is opened it feels like the character opened the door for you and smiled at you. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56416?scroll_to=617776 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56416?scroll_to=617776 I agree with Braden. I think it can be used as marketing for the film since in the movies we have watched so far in class have not included singing. So this could have be a different and daring way of drawing an audience to the film which was different than the average Hollywood production. I also think that it creates more romance between the characters because singing together or to someone specific is often and intimate experience. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56416?scroll_to=617775 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56416?scroll_to=617775 There is thrill associated with Marie's character. Not only is attention drawn to her because of her singing but later on when the wallet is returned and the drama of the stray bullet insues, he is drawn to her and the danger she might represent. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56414?scroll_to=576310 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56414?scroll_to=576310 Maybe the meaning can be grasped by the film but as anther comment mentions its "depths" can not be. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:18 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56414?scroll_to=576309 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56414?scroll_to=576309 Differently in the sense of stereotypes. For example there is often a stereotype about New Yorkers being really rude and many people believe that so if in a movie people from New York are not rude then maybe the stereotype might change. Obviously the stereotype of being conservative is on a grander scale than being rude. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56413?scroll_to=575613 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56413?scroll_to=575613 I agree with the comparison of the seed. The book and the movie a like have stayed in my mind long after I finished them. I even went on to tell my parents and my coworkers about it because Temple and her story clings to you. It creates a form of disbelief that follows you long after the last page. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56413?scroll_to=575612 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56413?scroll_to=575612 I agree with Polina the book is a little hard to follow at first but as the author of the quote says once you get drawn it you're "plunged through the intricacies of its plot.." After you finally get into the plot of the story it becomes easier to read and easier to follow. I found myself drawn in after Gowan was carried into the bedroom all bloody and snoring. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56413?scroll_to=575610 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56413?scroll_to=575610 I think the line "..a potent drug of the imagination..." actually can be referring to Temple's desires being reflected onto the reader. A potent drug is normally something illicit and generally harmful but the experience can be pleasurable and addictive. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56414?scroll_to=575604 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56414?scroll_to=575604 Somehow I find myself comparing the Story of Temple Drake to modern day 50 Shades of Grey. Although I haven't 50 shades of grey I heard the movie does not compare to the book. Its similar in the fact that the movie can not as sinister as the book because as Braden stated a movie needs to obtain certain standards. Furthermore I think Faulkner was a fan of clipped dialogue but not strictly in the lines of the character but also the actions. Based on some of Temple's actions in the movie the audience could infer some of the things that are explicit in the book. (Her love for the gangster that raped her, enjoying sex, ect) Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56414?scroll_to=575597 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56414?scroll_to=575597 There is many details in books that simply can not be shown in movies because they would make the movie too long and hard to follow. Therefore the comment by Bruce Kawin implies that the movie can not grasp the true meaning behind the book and its various details. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56414?scroll_to=575593 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56414?scroll_to=575593 I agree with Braden. I believe that since the original Story of Temple Drake probably created a lot of controversy because there was nothing like this in the conservative society at the time therefore making its own popularity. Faulkner's story is based in the south (Mississippi) which is historically more conservative also so having this film released across the states people might of started to think of the south differently. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569676 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569676 I think I agree. The nonchalant way that Young and Tone acted around did not let Bogard really understand the true horrors of war until he went on the boat. Bogard and the other pilots viewed shooting down planes kind of as a game. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569675 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569675 When I first began to watch the movie I could not figure out if Ronnie was her brother or her other lover. The way she acted towards both men seemed to be love rather than platonic love and romantic love. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569672 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569672 Wait, they "objected the monosyllabic dialogue"? Why? The film was supposed to be set in England so why would they object something that makes the characters actually speak as if they are actually from England? Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569656 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569656 I think Joan was concerned because her character was not originally supposed to be in the play and she might not have wanted her character to seem less out of place, therefore asking Faulkner to adjust her dialogue. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569654 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569654 I think its interesting that Hawks said no to flashbacks. Sanctuary was almost filmed in flashback form. Did Faulker have anything to do with the production of that film? or Hawks? Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569652 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56412?scroll_to=569652 For this story I think the flashbacks were necessary. The story only made sense being told in a linear fashion focusing on the story line first the characters second just as Hawks wanted. The whole structure of the movie and maybe even the flow of it would have changed if it was in flashback form. Diana/Joan Crawford would also have played a smaller part if the story was in flashback form. Bogard would have been the character the audience would have followed instead of Diana. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562801 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562801 I disagree. I do not think that its a negative view of screenwriting I think this quote shows Faulkner's understanding of his own talent. He improved upon a movie he didn't want to do but still improved upon i as the "doctor". Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562800 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562800 If studio popularity was brought by actors, directors and writers I would think that having Faulker's name credited and written on the posters could have helped "The Southerner" become more popular even more so than it was at the Film Festival as Waliour mentioned. I don't understand why the studio would let Faulkner even write it if he was on contract with another studio. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562798 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562798 If the movie "Hail, Caesar!" directed by the Coen brothers has any historical accuracy I think that the studios had too much responsibilities for their actors. Each studio seemed to be creating personas for the actors and actresses they had employed under contract. If any actor or actress stepped out of line and their public image was damaged by something they did the studio would do their best to cover it up, because if an actor looked bad the studio looked bad. If actors and actresses are not under contract then the studio is not represented by them and the studio no longer needs to hire so much public relations staff to clean up the messes actors could make. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562790 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562790 Professor do you know how often the actors wanted the script changed from what Faulkner originally wrote? I think it would be interesting to know how often the actors did not want to play the part as he intended it to be. How many agreed or maybe disagreed with his writing and how he portrayed the characters within the story? Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562786 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562786 I think I agree with Braden. I agree that the quality of his writing did not change for the worse after working in Hollywood. But I think he began to work to please the audience and those paying him rather than pleasing himself with his work. This article even mentions how he adapted a screenplay from "Brooch" but changed the ending for a more "positive conclusion to appease the show's sponsors" Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562777 https://nowcomment.com/documents/56411?scroll_to=562777 Did Faulkner ever try to retaliate for not being credited for contributing to The Southerner? From what you've mentioned in class he seems like a prideful man. After all he did pretend to have a limp after the war he never actually fought in. I can't imagine that not being credited sat well with him. Thu, 27 Apr 2023 16:01:17 -0400