"His Girl Friday" and the 3 Act Structure.

The 3 act structure within the film, His Girl Friday, is quite simple. In the film, Hildy is a former journalist who comes to say goodbye to her ex-husband (Walter, who is also the Editor of the newspaper) and run off with another man whom she has fallen in love with. But Walter does not want her to leave, and tricks her any way he can so she can stay and write for his paper. Through Berg's terminology, we will look at the plot points of the film, and where and what the climax is of the film.
The intro of the film just sets up the situation of Hildy and Walter's past relationship. We see how the two interact with one another, as well as how they both act with Hildy's new fiance, Bruce. Walter wants Hildy to stay and cover the story of a convict (Earl Williams) about to face the death penalty. There is much controversy with the situation, with people for/against the penalty, as well as thinking that Earl is an innocent man. Seeing as Hildy loves a good story, and with a desire for writing, she decides to stay in town (instead of hopping a train with her new to be hubby). This is the first plot point within the film. This plot point asks a question (what will the article read, will Williams be freed, etc.) and the next act will answer this question. This first plot point is at 23 minutes.
The film goes on, showing us the "answer" to the previous plot point's question. Hildy visits Williams in jail and writes her manuscript for the article. Once she has everything she needs for Walter, she wants to hop the train and head off to her big trip. But Walter still wants her to stay (and to secretly try to win her over). This time though, it is not Walter who convinces her to stay, but Earl Williams! He escapes his jail cell and finds Hildy to question her about the article she is soon about to publish. The second plot point (60 minutes out of 91) is at this moment: Hildy panics and calls up Walter. With both fright and delight she tells him that she has Earl Williams in the press room. This PP is exactly like the last one, but this transition also escalates the stakes. We don't know if the mad man will win or what will happen to Hildy, etc.
Hildy has a mad man in her newspaper press room, and everyone wants to know all the juicy details. Cops, family members, coworkers, and Walter all come to her aid and try to make out what exactly is going on. To not give much away, I will skip ahead to the climax! Now, you may think that the climax has something to do with Earl Williams and his psycho personality, but that is where you are wrong. Instead, the climax (which happens around 90:15/91) is this: Hildy realizes she really is in love with her goofball editor Walter and wants to stay with him. It's kind of sad for Bruce, but it makes everyone in the audience feel warm and cuddly, breaks the tension, provides a great deal of comfort (obviously), and shows us a perfect example of the Hollywood Happy Ending. His Girl Friday is a great example of the Hollywood 3 act structure, and all around a fun and enjoyable film.

30 Rock!

My favorite tv show is, without a doubt, 30 Rock. I love the humor and I have a huge crush on Tina Fey (who doesn't though, right?!) And after Professor Tait's lecture, I enjoyed trying to categorize 30 Rock within a sitcom category. Tait did use 30 Rock as an example within the lecture, but with the aspect of characters, and I can see that 30 Rock definitely has axial characters. But, what I could not figure out was whether the show was episodic or serial. I think that the show definitely has traits of both. Tait used an example with "Friends," asking if two characters will ever get together, which that itself displays both examples of serial and episodic. Seeing as Tait said that it is important for a sitcom to contain characteristics of both, 30 Rock is the perfect example of a sitcom containing both episodic and serial traits.
Throughout 30 Rock, we see the life and shenanigans of Liz Lemon, the head writer of a comedy show. Aside from her life, we see glimpses of other characters' lives, but only when Lemon is involved (which demonstrates the episodic characteristic of the sitcom; this really doesn't allow much character development for other characters, which is a tad disappointing). Liz always manages to learn a lesson from Jack Donague, or from her fellow coworkers. This lesson usually isn't learned until the last few minutes of the sitcom (a characteristic of episodic sitcoms), but the road to learning the lesson takes place the entire duration of the sitcom (this is where 30 Rock is not as serial centered). 30 Rock isn't as episodic in terms of the structure of the story lines. While most episodic sitcoms pick up where the last episode left off, 30 Rock doesn't have a structured plot. The script for the series is more sporadic as far as events and character development (meaning 30 Rock does not follow a long term plot, but does mean that the plot is not as predictable, a serial characteristic). To put it plain and simple, 30 Rock is an acrobat, walking a tight rope between Episodic and Serial.

The Lion King...in Film making Terms

Throughout this post is the dissection of Disney's best animated feature, The Lion King, throughout the terms of film making (as previously stated). Through three types of shots, we will see both the connotative and denotative interpretations for the three basic shots (LS, MS, CU).

The long shot: What I remember most (aside from the great musical numbers) from this movie was Simba’s journey back to Pride Rock. It was a nice simple long shot with Simba represented in two forms: one was in a small form, running across the screen, and the other displayed just his paws on top of the first shot, in a lower opacity. The denotative description of this shot is simple: it sets up the “going home” scene perfectly. The orientation shot shows us Simba leaving the world of Hakuna Matata, and going back to his responsibilities at Pride Rock. This sets up a moment of happiness. Yay, Simba is finally going home to challenge Scar and take his place as King of the Pridelands! However, when we look at this in a connotative connotation, we analyze it in a different matter. Simba is represented as a tiny form, and we see the scenery on a much larger level. The fact that he is so small shows us how isolated the character is, and how overwhelming his surroundings may be. Even though he is going home and we see this as a good thing, through the connotative description of the long shot we understand that his journey isn’t easy since he leaves his friends behind and ventures off alone.(In the screen shot, you can barely see little Simba, but his blurry shape is right above the paw in the shot)



MS- As the movie progresses and Simba reaches Pride Rock, we see a glimpse of his home and what it now looks like with Scar as King. Then we see a scene with Scar and Simba’s mother, Sarabi, which provides an excellent medium shot. In this shot, the audience understands what life is like now that Scar is King of the Pridelands (denotative). Through the screen shot, we see a nice visual representation of the two attitudes between the two characters. Sarabi keeps her head high and tries not to break to Scar and his dictatorship. Scar, however, is the opposite, and he is displayed as evil and downright mean. Their relationship (connotative) is perfectly spelled out through their words as well as their nonverbal communication.

 CU- Simba to the rescue! After Scar attacks Sarabi and Simba steps in, the audience sees interaction between Scar and Simba. Throughout these scenes, most are close up shots between the two rivals. Here we examine the important detail (denotative) of the two characters. We see Simba and how he really feels towards Scar. There is resentment throughout his words, and written all over his mane (connotative). Even with the close ups of Scar, he looks frightened and worried. Throughout their sharing of words, there lies the important detail of the plot of the story and what enfolds in the next couple of minutes.

The Lion King displays perfect examples of the shots we learned in class, as well as shot progression. Aside from just shots, the film also displays great camera angles and variations.

Hollywood!

  The studio system during the early days of Hollywood acted as nothing but promotion. Through Tait's lecture, we saw how strict Hollywood maintained its vertical integration. Through various examples, we see how stars, and even directors and screenwriters were seen as a way to bring in the money. But in reality, we never see, or recognize their names much later on throughout the years (we recognize the titles "Gone with the Wind," and "Casablanca," but in reality we probably wouldn't ever guess the person who directed either film).
   Through "contract talent," the studio system owned certain people to keep their image (or studio name) alive throughout pop culture. Studios like MGM managed to film movies with stars who had big voices and thus, most of MGM's films were musicals (examples: "Singing in the Rain," "The Wizard of Oz") MGM knew that the singing voice of Judy Garland would bring their studio popularity, and it became known that whatever movie Garland was in, she would probably be singing sometime throughout the film. Aside from just singing, some of the stars would even include other MGM stars (example: seeing Garland sing to the infamous Clark Gable).
As sad as it is, audiences saw the rise and fall of Judy Garland (who is a perfect example of the studio's "contract talent"). After fame and recognition in "The Wizard of Oz," people saw her singing in more and more movies by MGM. However, MGM Studios eventually overworked Garland, and her fame soon went downhill. After constantly moving from film to film within MGM Studios, she couldn't keep up with all of the Hollywood fame, or continue to live among "the stars in heaven." As we all know, Garland died by an accidental overdose, after all her life she was told this and that about her appearance by various studio executives, and even attempted to commit suicide more than one time.
The studio system liked to use their stars, rather than just "promote" them. Though contract system seemed like a good idea (i.e using singing sensations in various films and promoting other actors in the process), there could also be drawbacks, as anyone could see just by reading about the life of Judy Garland.

Sitcom Through the Ages

After watching "All in the Family"  and clearly seeing a difference between the sitcoms of the 70s to our own modern shows, you really can't just sit there and not compare and contrast ideas, story lines, character ambitions, and overall structure of teevee. And with that, comes my comparison between the popular 70s show, "All in the Family" and my own personal favorite ABC sitcom, "Modern Family."
  Let's take a loot at the similarities: between the two shows we see the use of comedy to really lighten the moods of characters, and to set the general atmosphere of the show's episode (of course, this is the strategy of any sitcom that is now airing on our tv sets). The issues of the sitcom's episode seem to be revealed through the use of jokes and laughter. In "All in the Family," we see Archie as the "class clown" of the family. With whoever he is talking to, or whatever he is talking about, Archie makes sure to crack a joke within every scene of the sitcom. For example, when Archie finds out that his company for the evening is a homosexual, he calls him a fairy, makes fun of his clothes and even takes a few jabs at his dialogue. In "Modern Family," the show features an open gay relationship. And like Archie, the other characters (including one of the gay man's parents) often crack a few jokes about the two men, all in a lighthearted manner.Going further within the similarities, I can't help but see the two father characters and their personalities. Archie doesn't like the fact that a gay man is in his house, or even around at the local bar. It is almost as if he is the conservative among his liberal family. The rest of the family enjoys the company of people, regardless of sexual orientation. There is a similar relationship in "Modern Family:" the father of one of the gay men, Jay, is accepting of his son's relationship with another man, but throughout the course of the show, he tends to give his son and his actions the cold shoulder (not all the time, but sometimes), he even makes some jokes that can instantly be taken as awkward or a little rude. While Jay is sometimes conservative about the issue, the rest of his family (his young wife, daughter, her husband, etc...) never seems to make a big deal about the gay relationship. If they make a joke about something, it is just a joke, there is no rude truth behind a simple jab.
But just because both sitcoms focus on comedy as a way to get construct issues and develop the plot, the kind of comedy is what sets the two apart. When we look at Archie and dissect his humor, it can easily be taken as cruel (like I said, calling a homosexual a "fairy" and having vulgar and rude nicknames for him throughout the episode). He says his humor is just "joking," but anything that comes out of his mouth can contain some hidden truth, or be taken the wrong way. Besides, watching the episode, anyone could easily hear a joke and know that is is meant for comedic relief. There's a fine line between having a good time and trying to cause harm. Archie's humor is intended to cause harm before it is meant to provide a few laughs to the characters. In "Modern Family," the humor is lighthearted: we can easily tell the jabs are meant to make the characters and audience laugh. There's no tone in the characters' voices that can convey a double entendre. Also looking at the time period, and just looking at the specific episode, we see that sexuality is very taboo. Now a days we see sexuality everywhere, and it isn't considered "bad" or frowned upon. The gay couple on "Modern Family" is openly gay, not only with family members, but also all around their neighborhood and society in general. Of course, this is only different because of the time period. In our society, sexuality has greatly come forward within media outlets, people, and other society outlets. In the 70s, homosexuality was something not to be discussed at the dinner table, but now we have advanced as a society to (somewhat) accept people for who they are, regardless of sexual orientation.
Obviously "Modern Family" will show much "modern" issues and up to date morals and what not, since it is a sitcom in our own "modern" society. "All in the Family" focuses on one family along with one issue or topic of the episode. We see the family's reactions to this topic, and how it progresses throughout the course of the episode. This is different from "Modern Family" because we see one issue develop into different scenarios, creating a bigger plot within the story line. We have different stories revolving around an issue and we see the development of scenarios and characters. By comparing the two shows, we see the great advancements that sitcoms have made throughout the years and among society.
"Modern Family" trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5uuMr1YEyE