[Course Description] [Schedule and Course Outline][Lessons (Resource Questions)][Mid-Term Exam] [Paper Assignment (and Examples)] [Final Exams]
Answer either question one or two, but not both.
1. Suppose someone said, "You wrote about The Fugitive for your final exam! I saw that movie. It was fun, but why would anyone want to pay it any attention?" How would you respond? Is The Fugitive typical, important because it illustrates some norm? Or is it exceptional or unique, important because it distinguishes itself in some manner?
2. Using The Fugitive as your sole example, tell
someone (an imaginary reader who hasn't taken
a film course) how continuity editing (and specifically the
shot/reverse-shot pattern) is central to
advancing Hollywood-style narratives. Refer to specific shots in
the film; discuss the art/film
technique of "matching."
Answer either of the next two questions, but do not answer both.
3. The Fugitive is an unrestricted narrative (which, of course, means that its story is told by an unseen, omniscient narrator). But as B&T write: "Narration is never completely unrestricted. There is always something we are not told, even if it is only how the film will end." In The Fugitive, what don't we know? How does not knowing affect or structure the viewing experience, our ability to generate story from plot cues, our emotional response to characters?
4. This question, in two parts, prompts you employ the concept
of "depth" as a means of opening
up The Fugitive. First, by what means--objective or
subjective--are we as viewers granted access
to the psychological states of the film's characters? Second,
what is the story-telling function of
the flashbacks? In answering these questions, state your thesis,
substantiate it with an example or
two, and then press towards a generalization that tells readers
how your observation or thesis is
important to the film as a whole.
Answer one of the following five questions.
5. Assume that your readers understand Labov's six parts of an anecdote, but also assume that they haven't actively employed his theories to think about The Fugitive. First, tell them where the evaluation section of the film occurs--i.e., what scene. Second, tell them how evaluative moments push forward this film's narrative.
6. Roland Barthes once argued that narratives are less about rushing headlong to a conclusion than they are about strategies for delaying resolution. The Fugitive, if we assume Barthes' perspective, is a series of elaborate evasive maneuvers (deferring an inevitable conclusion). But it doesn't feel that way. Why not?
7. Dr. Richard Kimble doesn't do just one good deed. He does many. Why? Why is it a story-telling necessity to make the good doctor keep being good? Give several reasons and refer to a specific scene or two.
8. Deputy Samuel Gerard (Tommy Lee Jones) is clearly the most interesting character in The Fugitive. Dr. Kimble (Harrison Ford) is, albeit on a rather sophisticated level, little more than a prop. His character is static (he's constantly alert, constantly in a state of terror). Describe your feelings towards Deputy Gerard, and tell how they are, in fact, effects of editing, mise-en-scene, and cinematographic choices.
9. Using both thematic and formal materials from The
Fugitive, tell how you would demonstrate
the concept of "motivation" to an audience of adults not well
versed in film theory.
Everybody must tackle this last question. At its heart lies the assumption that nobody enjoys films for purely formal reasons. Content always matters.
10. Develop this thesis as a way to account for the popularity of The Fugitive: Should we want to discuss current vexed attitudes about the concept of "justice," we could find no better starting point than The Fugitive. It is truly a myth (an explaining story) for our times. It brilliantly represents widely held assumptions, not just about cops and courts, but about both social and natural order.