[Kristen Druse]

I personally signed up for this class because I haven’t really read much Dickens (excluding the abridged Great Illustrated Classics that I tore through as a kid), and he’s an author I would really like to be more familiar with. I also really enjoyed taking Brit Lit II and I like 19th century British writing in general, so I figured that there was a good chance that I would find this course pretty interesting.

[Kristen Druse]

I may be the only person in class who felt this way, but I actually thought that the contemporary music that Luhrmann incorporated worked very well in terms of the overall qualities of the film. There were many components besides the soundtrack that strayed from historical accuracy, and I thought that the music helped connect our modern conceptions of over-the-top luxury with this very defined period in history. I loved that these big name modern artists also included bits of jazz and Motown to embody the 20’s while still contributing to Luhrmann’s specific, modern, and detail-rich interpretation.

[Kristen Druse]

I agree that at its core, Witness is about people and their capability to react and adapt to unfamiliar situations and environments. I think that this reality makes the prevalence of the “male gaze” even more significant. Throughout the film, Rachel is portrayed through a very apparent and specific lens. This is even more fascinating because of her internal struggle over her role as a religious woman. Book clearly is attracted to Rachel and she develops feelings for him as well, and the growth of their relationship is shown almost entirely through camera work rather than dialogue or physical contact. One such example is when Book first wakes up after his recovery from his gunshot wound and watches Rachel sleeping in the chair next to him. He is able to blatantly stare at her without her knowledge, which makes her seem ignorant to her power as a beautiful woman. The male gaze is also utilized during the barn raising, when Rachel is pouring drinks at the table, and more than a few of the men shamelessly watch her complete her task. She seems slightly more aware of being watched during this scene, but in the moment she still seems very naive. It’s fascinating that Peter Weir chose to portray the Amish Rachel as such a magnetic force of attraction.

[Kristen Druse]

I think it should really be emphasized that Shaw would not be the protagonist he was without the impact of the men in his regiment. While we don’t get any real taste of the black soldiers in the book form of this story, I think that Edward Zwick does a fantastic job of balancing the focus on Shaw’s leadership with the significant and influential qualities of the men he leads. Shaw was a good man with good goals from the outset of the film, but he never would have been able to achieve half of what he did with half the amount of poise without the learning from the men who, a few years earlier or in a different part of the country, he wouldn’t even be expected to communicate with. I thought this film was unique from the other films we’ve seen so far in that it capitalized on the importance of unexpected influences and the great value in keeping an open mind.

[Kristen Druse]

I was personally also surprised at how generally entertaining I found this movie. Obviously the only real outlet for comedy was physical humor, which I thought would become tiring after a while, but somehow this movie managed to remain both funny and poignant.

[Author]

Posts