The Piano

I think Baines and Ada’s relationship in the film is technically considered rape by definition, but in the sense of the film does not entirely feel that way. As the film is told through Ada’s point of view, and she is married to a man she does not know and does not connect with, you cannot help but see her connection with Baines as ok. Over the course of the film, Baines does lure her into him by using the piano as bait, but the relationship eventually becomes consensual. It is because of her will to go back to him that it is hard to consider what he did as rape because Ada now feels for him, and wants to be with him. The only problem is that she is married to Stewart, making the relationship unlawful. Adding to Ada’s desire to be with Baines, in the scene where she is caressing Stewart’s back, she pulls away when he goes for her accentuating the point of view of the film. She has been forced to marry this man that she feels nothing with, and seeing the film from her perspective, her connection with Stewart is definitely not consensual. Her connection with Baines however is eventually seen as something to be desired.

The Vanishing Questions

2. The most important shot in the abduction scene is Saskia looking at the family portrait of Raymond. This is the motivation for her to get into the car because she assumes that he is an okay person and a family man, that he is safe. The portrait builds her confidence with him and allows her to feel that Raymond isn’t capable of doing anything, and is being honest. It also highlights the fact that horror could be anywhere, even in the mind of a seemingly normal father.

3. In the second practice attempt, the shot begins as a medium shot. In this, shot Raymond is practicing his approach to get a woman in his car, so the camera gives room to the framing as if there were a person standing there. As the shot continues, the camera pans over, following Raymond and the imaginary woman, and even shifts over as the door opens to accommodate for the space the woman would take up as she moves. The camera then pans across the car as Raymond walk behind to enter the driver’s side door, keeping the passenger side of the car in view the entire shot.

Spoorloos Vs. The Vanishing

The fact that they same person directed these two films is very surprising. The original was a much more compelling story and telling of the story because it allowed the viewer to become connected to the material. The pace of the film, compared to the remake let the material sink in more and there was time for questioning of what is happening and why. It almost seemed silly watching the remake after watching the original because of how they introduced scenes and how they got to certain parts of the film, for example, the tunnel scene. In the original, the film started out by introducing the couple and had a space of time that we got to connect with them and sit with them to get to know them a little bit before something happened. So by the time they got in the tunnel, and ran out of gas, we had already seen her tell him to get gas and become frustrated along with her. Also, as the title suggests, we know that someone or something is going to vanish, so by pacing it slower and building the characters, you are waiting for the moment for one of them to disappear. When Rex arrives back at the car, and Saskia is gone, there is a real sense or worry because we now know the characters, at least a little, and had some suspense build to the point that you would be worried if one of them were gone. However, in the remake, this whole situation is fast paced and not introduced near as well. There is no real connection established with the characters before the tunnel, and by the time he runs out of gas, she just mentions that she told him to get it earlier. Introducing lines like this, very rushed and forced, make the scenes feel silly and bad. Then, by the time he gets back to the car, there is not a real sense or worry or danger established because of how quick and abrupt the scene was introduced.

Another scene that again stood out because of introduction and pacing was Raymond or Barney trying to persuade the women into his car. The original had such a building up to what it was that he was doing, and not really introducing him till later in the film that let you be with him and try to figure out why. He was first introduced just when the car went by him, and then later we found out why he was shown. Also, because it focuses in on him trying and failing so much, you start to fear for him a bit and fear that something is really wrong with him. In the remake, Barney, the new unimproved Raymond, was just sort of boring and weird. It was partly because of the scenes themselves and the fact that everything was rushed, but also because the character wasn’t near as compelling. They showed him fail a couple times, and then just through on how he came to his final realization of how it was he was going to accomplish his task. In comparing the two characters, Raymond was a much more subtle mysteriously creepy guy, that showed a lot of persistence for a reason that was unknown. Barney was an annoyingly forced weird character that left no real mystery to his reasoning.

One of the other main additions to the remake that had no place in being there, and took away form the initial story was the newfound relationship. I’m not sure why he put this in the remake, but it is completely unnecessary and frustrating. It moved the story along way too fast, and kind of took over the real plot of the film, which was the vanishing of the girl. The new girlfriend just had no place in the story as a remake of the original. In the end, she was only there to try to be the hero and destroy what was originally a terrifying ending.

The main theme and idea of the original was all about the golden egg dream, which I didn’t realize until literally the very end of the film when they showed both photos of the couple and framed them with an oval. That, as an ending to the story was fantastic and horrifying all at the same time. It connected the story to the characters and created a more psychologically interesting film by using a more metaphoric reasoning to the conception of the film, rather than a happy boring ending. It brought you inside more, and gave me a moment of extreme realization in the end when they were both finally in their “golden eggs” and it was finally all over, like their dreams foretold. In conclusion, the original created a much more physiologically sound experience that was well connected and read through by the end. The remake was silly in comparison, especially having watched the two back to back.

Allen Scene Analysis

2. Woody Allen’s comedy is not mimetic because he not attempting to represent reality. He attempts to recollect the memories based on the way he wants to remember them. He is representing the way we actually remember things, in scattered thought, with variations thought about after the fact. He is adding more life to the memories being told in the film, by telling them in the way he would now, being that it is years passed, and he has had time to think on them and understand the situation differently.

3. While the verbal conversation is going on, the subtitles at the bottom of the screen show what the characters are thinking because they obviously aren’t going to say to each other what the subtitles say. It makes the conversation closer to what is really being communicated in this situation, and also how each of the characters are both critiquing each other and themselves during the conversation. It’s a very clever and comical way to further the conversation and juxtapose what is actually happening on screen.

Allen's Comedy Style

I find Allen’s comedy style very effective. I think the stepping out of the illusion of the film creates a better connection between viewer and creator. In a situation like Allen’s character in Annie Hall, his character is very quirky and specific about things, so to step out and explain the situation, it helps you to understand what is happening. For example, in the scene where they are reading the play he wrote, without him stepping out and commenting on the play just being a reinterpretation of his life, but with a happy ending, it seems a little pitiful. But to comment on it in that way, it becomes self-deprecating, and the viewer is able to sort of laugh with him. This style is useful in that it allows him to further his character development and ground the joke in reality as well. Most jokes are funny or relatable because of how we connect them to ourselves, and to break the boundary of the film’s illusion, it grounds the joke in reality, and in turn with the viewer.

Visual Strategy in Daisies

            Chytilova’s visual strategy throughout the film is to keep the viewer on end and to keep attention. There are color changes, scene changes, and montages that happen so suddenly that you have to stay focused to know what is happening. I think by playing with the visuals in that sense, it allows you to also connect with the playful nature of the film and it’s story. It keeps the entertainment and playful aspect continuing, similar to the girls’ actions in the film, as they are repeatedly breaking things, cutting things, and humiliating people. Chytilova takes it upon herself to really get inside of the head of the two girls, and give the film the character that they have.