Hey guys, hope you’ve all been having a good week. So the way that
blogging is going to go this week is slightly different since we have two
movies and two discussion leaders. On this post I will be discussing Weekend and Nicky will have a separate blog
post that focuses on Medicine
for Melancholy. You may feel free to comment briefly on both of our post or
just on one of them. You can also relate the movies to each other even if
you’re just commenting on one post rather than both. Here we go.
Even though the movie Weekend seems very simplistic there is much to
discuss, so I would like to separate my blog post into four different sections
to make sure that I cover all main points and ideas.
To start off I’d like to discuss a broad topic that is also
responsible for the overarching mood and tone throughout the film and that
includes its music, setting, and atmosphere. If you pay close attention to the
music throughout the film you will find that there is not a single scene with
background music. We only hear music when the characters hear music, which is
definitely an interesting choice on the Haigh’s part. Usually the point of
music in movies is to create a specific mood or emphasize the characters
emotions. Do you think that the lack of music diminished the emotion
experienced throughout the film, or do you think that in this case it amplified
the emotion? Branching off of that question, what do you think Haigh’s message
was in reducing the amount of background noise that was heard? Moving on to
setting, I think its safe to say that the movie was set in various mundane
places: clubs, apartments, houses, and a snippet of a carnival. Considering
that there was nothing extraordinary about any of these places or about the
events of the plot itself, how does this allow us to see an abnormal meaning in
the events of everyday life? Moreover, let us discuss the atmosphere and how
the music and setting help create it. With the lack of music and he mundane
settings we are forced to focus on the characters themselves and the dialogue
that goes on between them. Based on this, discuss the atmosphere or mood that
was created during any scene that you found particularly important, and explain
why you believe it to be significant.
“Concrete” was
mentioned several times throughout the film in regards to Glen’s life and his
inability to change. How does the idea of being held back by others and not
being allowed to grow or change relate to being a hipster? On the other hand
Russell seemed to have a very different perspective on life when compared to
Glen. Russell believed in relationships and in people being happily in love,
while, due to his past, Glen did not. Do you think that this opposing view on life
aided their attraction to each other or made them more of a “hipster” couple?
Moreover, the relationship portrayed in the film became very intense over a
short period of time. Does this give us any insight into the hipster
relationship?
To address the first question, I thought that the lack of background music throughout the film was an incredibly effective directing choice. Instead of filling scenes with supplementary emotion in the form of music, Haigh stripped the emotion down to a very raw and simplistic level, which I believed greatly enhanced the movie's sentiments rather than inhibiting them. The absence of music, I believe, created a much more intimate connection between the characters and the viewer because there was no source of artificially-created feeling.The movie almost took on a documentary-like feel because the filming was not excessively edited like most other dramas (in both the auditory and visual sense). Because we only heard the music that the characters were hearing, as viewers we were placed more directly into their lives. We heard and saw exactly what the two men were feeling rather than having these feelings enhanced with music in order to create a certain mood or intensify a certain character’s emotion. I think that with the use of this technique, Haigh intended to break down the passion and feeling in the film to its barest form, creating a sense of earnestly and authenticity within the movie’s intended emotional output. Traditional background music in a movie can create a contrived sense of artificiality; While this music is clearly effective in augmenting the viewers emotional connection to the film, it can also take away from the raw emotion that is created by the uninhibited dialogue, interactions, body language, etc. of the characters themselves. The use of mundane settings also reinforces Haigh’s technique of creating raw emotion. The plot itself is not overfly dramatic or filled with conflict, therefore it only makes sense that the places in which the characters interact are just as unremarkable. However, I think that the lack of dramatic climax and elaborate setting creates the same emotion feeling than does the lack of music. By presenting the characters' relationship in a very mundane, every-day manner, viewers are able to relate better to their situation and easily feel the emotions that they are feeling. As a whole, Haigh’s raw-emotion technique creates an overarching feeling of utter genuineness throughout the film. The characters and their relationship are presented realistically rather than idealistically, ultimately creating an emotional message in the film that is more honest and impactful than if it were to be filmed in a more conventional manner.
ReplyDeleteI think that your second set of questions beginning with the idea of "concreteness" highlights a crucial irony in Glen's view(s) towards life, most notably when you align it with his inability to change. It is ironic because what Glen seems to want more than anything is to exist as a fluid identity. This tendency recalls to mind a lot of what we have been talking about in regards to hipster fungibility or elasticity. I'm thinking of the cyclical nature of the hipster, like capitalism, to morph their desires and drives when something, say a trend for instance, has been exhausted or has become mainstream. It is interesting, then, that it is Glen's resistance to "concreteness" that ends up sedimenting him. In relation to the hipster, I think Glen's ideology appeals to the angst that we have seen the hipster elicit in terms of being anti-culture, anti-identitarian. At one point Russel even says that his views are childish, implying that Glen's discontents are anti merely for the sake of being anti, and thus, in some way vapid. I definitely think that their respective histories definitely had an impact on how their relationship formed throughout the film. Russel being "closeted" and Glen being more than open with his sexuality allowed for introspection on both of their parts. It is Russel's being in the metaphoric closet that allowed him to have romanticized ideas about love and the possibility of intimate relationships. On the other hand, Glen's explicit sexuality and sexual experience, while making him confident and outgoing, I think, jaded him or made him distrust the possibility of real romantic love, whatever that is. Ultimately, I think what brought them so close is that they had what the other lacked: Glen opened Russel up to his sexuality, while Russel re-opened Glen's belief in love. As far as your last question is concerned I think that the way in which their relationship evolved so quickly says something less about hipster relationships than relationships in general. I think that, as we were saying last class, because of the rise of the internet and virtual profiles and blogs and identities online, it seems as if the way we relate to one another has been affected negatively. However, I don't think that the internet has damaged relations all that much, if anything, because of the presumed anxiety concerning the internet how we relate in real life has been heightened; or maybe precisely because of the internet we are more cognizant of how we interact and thus when we do have what seems to be like an intimate encounter with someone, our connection, whether fantasized or not, is added an extra dimension.
ReplyDeleteI think the lack of music in Weekend was one of the most important facets of the film. In many films nowadays music is used too often, and doesn’t add to the setting and characters. In Weekend the lack of music adds to a simplicity and powerfulness. I read a review of the film that explained that large parts of the dialogue and action were improvised. The lack of background noise allowed us to focus more on the spontaneous actions of the actors. To become more fully immersed in their actions. I think Haigh used the lack of music to emphasize the emotions of all the characters. Like I said earlier, there is nothing else to focus on besides the characters and the love between Russell and Glen. The setting goes hand and hand with the lack of background noise. The movie and story as a whole is simple. That isn’t a bad thing, but there aren’t surprise twist endings, or extreme special effects. This is purely a character driven movie, and that doesn’t need huge backgrounds. I think a scene that particularly highlights this minimalistic style of movie is the bed scene where Russell and Glen are talking. This is an extremely poignant and emotional part of the film, as Russell is telling Glen how he has never had the strength to truly come out, especially to his parents whom he has never met. The lack of music and very personal unmoving camera angles showcase the intensity of this scene and its importance to both of the characters. I think Emma brought up a good point. The lack of a true climax to the film. It ends in a very normal and uninventive way. Did that add to the story? or did it diminish the love story? I don’t view their relationship as being especially hipster. While the movie as a whole did feel that way, I think this movie was trying to prove, to an extent, that opposites attract. The fact that Russell and Glen had such differing opinions on love made their relationship that much more special. That being said the scene at the end where Russell and Glen kiss in public, an act Russell would never have done before that weekend, I noticed as being somewhat hipster. The idea of appropriating not cultural capital, but characteristics and openness of another, in this case Glen, resonated with me as being a very “hipster” act. Overall, I really enjoyed this movie and found the simplicity made it engrossing and interesting.
ReplyDeleteI concur with Emma and Marcus' comments about the lack of music in the movie. The lack of background music allowed the viewers to focus wholly on the deep level of emotion and the characters' interactions in the movie. This absence was critical in the creation of a movie so rooted in drama. I think that introduces a real-life parallel and hipster critique of society today: without background music, or ongoing circumstances or distractions in daily life (i.e., technology), how we interact with others becomes increasingly productive and a central focus.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I think that Rafael hits on the nail on the head when he calls out Glen's obsession with the "concrete" as ironic, given his desire to exist as a "fluid identity" (to quote Rafael). The paradoxical nature of Glen's personality (the concreteness versus the fluidity) was something that attracted Russell to him, but tainted their relationship. Because of Glen's preoccupation with his own aspirations and adversarial relationships, he finds himself unable to fully commit to Russell. Whilst Glen ultimately left at the train station a believer in love, this realization came too late. I think this exemplifies the hipsters' preoccupation with the self (might this be considered a sort of pseudo-elitism, as the hipster's focus is almost always on him- or her- self?).
In response to Marcus' question about the lack of a true climax in the film, I would argue that it added to their love story. It made the futility and pursuit of Glen and Russell's relationship that much more relatable. A climatic point of a relationship is [more times than not] a purely cinematic, dramatized moment; everyday, mundane relationships often lack one. Thus, I think that it's a hipster innovation on the behalf of Weekend's directors-slash-producers-slash-writers to have not included a climax.
I didn’t notice the lack of music. I think the purpose behind the lack of music was, as many people have mentioned, to focus the audience purely on character development and character interaction. Heigh wanted to get the audience engrossed in the story, and sometimes music can detract from that. I also agree that the lack of music enforced the fact that this film is meant to be real - and we don’t have a live soundtrack to our lives - so giving the film background music would have negatively impact the realism of the film. Additionally, the lack of background music in the majority of the scenes gives more leeway for sound designers as opposed to just playing whatever songs speak to the characters’ current mode. Sound designers can manipulate the sound of the environment more, further bringing the audience into the story.
ReplyDeleteI think the idea of concreteness says a lot about how we form the definition of hipster. In a way, you can boil hipsterism down to being what happens when people change and do things differently - when someone rejects the conception that life is concrete - that there’s no way to get around things and to change them. Glen embodies this ideal, and throughout the film as he explains his opinion on the right for gay people to be able to show their affection and talk about sex equally as straight people and how that’s not what life is like for him in England.