Chapter 11 stresses that the adoption of a particular critical point-of-view will impact the way that a film analyst or critic looks at a particular film (i.e. a critic analyzing a film based on its adherence to classical narrative modes will highlight different aspects of the film than a critic analyzing a film based on its ideological meanings). Taking this into account, read through a number of the film reviews posted at the Women's Studies Database Film Reviews, a website which presents reviews from critics analyzing films in terms of how female viewers might respond to them. How does this particular critical stance affect what aspects of the films these critics address? Are there particular concerns that recur across a number of reviews? What other ways might one analyze film?

Chapter 11 presents an extensive analysis of Man with a Movie Camera, focusing on how its style and form work together to express Dziga Vertov's beliefs about reality and the power of the cinema. At the following website, you can find a poster advertising Man with a Movie Camera. This poster tries to boil down the essence of the film into a few iconic images. Based on your reading of the chapter, explain how the representations on this poster encapsulate what Man with a Movie Camera is about and how it is constructed--how does this poster comment on the form and style of the film? How does the form of the still image differ from the film's? Why does the film accomplish Vertov's goal?

View a film at any of a number of websites presenting short films (http://www.atomfilms.com, http://www.binarytheater.com, http://www.ifilm.com, http://www.shortfest.com, http://www.thebitscreen.com, http://www.bijoucafe.com). [You may wish to watch a few films to settle on the one you'd most like to discuss]. Then analyze the film based on what you consider to be, in this case, the most appropriate of the four analytical approaches utilized in Chapter 11 (classical narrative cinema; narrative alternatives to classical cinema; documentary form and style; form, style and ideology). How do style and form work together within the context of the approach you are utilizing?

As the sections in Chapter 11 on Meet Me in St. Louis and Raging Bull illustrate, a film's form and style are tightly tied to their ideological implications, and as such, a filmmaker can manipulate elements of form and style to serve particular ideological and social purposes. This fact is a crucial underpinning of a recent film movement called Dogme 95, a film movement established in 1995 by four Danish filmmakers. Dogme filmmaking is intended as a stark alternative to the special effects-driven blockbusters from Hollywood, which these filmmakers view as a cinema barren of true artistry and true emotion. Operating under a strict manifesto and set of rules (what they have termed "The Vow of Chastity"), Dogme films utilize specific alternative forms, styles and production methods for a resulting alternative end product. You can find more information about the Dogme 95 project (www.dogme95.dk/) at their website (including their Manifesto and Vow of Chastity), and you can also read an essay about the Dogme movement on a separate site. After reading through these materials, discuss what you think is the purpose of Dogme 95 filmmaking. What alternatives does this method of filmmaking present to classical or mainstream methods? What might be the ideological or social implications of these particular methods? Do these methods have anything in common with the descriptions of Breathless and Tokyo Story as presented in Chapter 11? Could the Dogme filmmakers achieve their goals?