Session One The Quirky Model Department of Film & Audiovisual Culture, Masaryk University Dr. Richard Nowell ¨ ¨ ¨1. Brief Course Overview ¨ ¨2. Conceptualizing Quirky ¨ ¨3. Applying the Quirky Model ¨ ¨Structure: 6 2-hour sessions [22.09; 29.09; 20.10; 03.11; 24.11; 08.12] ¨ ¨Methods: Integrated seminar discussions and framing lecturettes ¨ ¨Preparation: 2 x screenings & 1 x reading with preparatory questions ¨ ¨Organization: All screenings and readings will be discussed in depth ¨ ¨Slides: Uploaded to MS TEAMS soon after each session takes place ¨ ¨Assessment: 1 x 1500-2000-word essay (choice of five prompts) ¨ ¨Feedback: One-page grade explanation emailed soon after receipt ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨Topic: Anglophone Quirky Cinema (mainly late 1990s to the present day) ¨ ¨Methods: Conceptual, textual, industrial, and social ¨ ¨Aim: Facilitate revisionist understandings of Quirky Cinema ¨ ¨Approach I: Moving beyond “Auteurist” accounts of Quirky Cinema ¨ ¨Approach 2: Questioning commonplace discourse about Quirky films ¨ ¨Outcome: Integrate other themes, target audiences, and industry positions ¨To develop a demonstrable understanding of: ¨ ¨I: Quirky cinema’s distinctive content. ¨ ¨II: Quirky cinema’s distinctive themes. ¨ ¨III: Quirky cinema’s distinctive modes of address. ¨ ¨Perhaps more so than any other genre, Quirky Cinema has been imagined through the prism of Auterism ¨ ¨This approach emphasizes a supposedly visionary director building a coherent, distinctive body of work ¨ ¨The filmmaker who has become synonymous with Quirky Cinema is of course the American Wes Anderson ¨ ¨But quirky extends beyond Anderson: it is a genre or a format that has been used internationally for 60 years ¨ ¨Conflating Quirky Cinema with Auteur filmmaking risks misrepresenting this form of genre cinema in 3 key ways ¨1. They risk misrepresenting a longstanding example of formula filmmaking as the topical vision of a single creative talent (Session 1) ¨ ¨2. They also risk misrepresenting tried-and-tested branding strategies as the unique worldview of that particular talent (Session 2) ¨ ¨3. The risk misrepresenting audience-targeting strategies as a cultural-insider’s intuitive contribution to their taste community (Session 3) ¨ ¨In order to develop a deeper understanding of Quirky Cinema, we really should confront three issues inherent in Auterist conceptions ¨ ¨Addressing them promises to generate more historically, culturally, and industrially sensitive understandings of this important format ¨ ¨When it comes to conceptualizing Quirky Cinema as a format that includes Anderson’s films, MacDowell has proven especially insightful ¨ ¨He argues that the makers of quirky films employ a content-tailoring model that invites viewers to consume them in a distinctive fashion … ¨ ¨1. What content distinguishes quirky cinema? ¨ ¨2. What are quirky films about? ¨ ¨3. How do quirky films encourage audiences to evaluate or process this material? ¨ ¨ ¨THEMES: The films centralize painful psychosocial issues derived from real-world personal development challenges ¨ ¨LOOK: But they wrap this potentially painful subject matter in an aesthetic conveying innocence and artificiality ¨ ¨COMEDY: The films also use various types of comedy to partially distance the audience from this serious material ¨ ¨TONE: They mix irony and sincerity to prompt sympathy for characters but also derision as we feel superior to them ¨ ¨AFFECT: This invites us to view the films both in ironic detached fashion and at times through sincere engagement ¨ ¨ ¨Quirky Cinema’s cultivation of sincere engagement alongside ironic detachment sets it apart from another prominent film trend ¨ ¨Smart Cinema was a production trend that peaked in the 1990s and 2000s, slightly before Quirky Cinema rose to prominence ¨ ¨It included films like Kids (1995), Trainspotting (1996), Fight Club (1999), and those of the writer-director Quentin Tarantino ¨ ¨Smart Cinema mixed emotional detachment, amorality, dark humor, cynicism, and irony (but very little emotional sincerity) ¨ ¨Such films were targeted at the Gen-X youth subculture, which was also seen to possess this exact combination of traits ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨1. How does this film use the Quirky Model ¨ aesthetically, narratively, thematically? ¨ ¨2. How did you respond emotionally to the ¨characters and situations in this film? ¨Narratively, this film presents an allegory of how Quirky films are intended ideally to operate in the real world ¨ ¨It does so by suggesting that building communities around media arts like itself can help to heal damaged people ¨ ¨After all most of the characters suffer emotional pain from human connections that have been broken over time ¨ ¨These include divorce, betrayal, and rejection, but most significantly bereavement (both Max and Miss Cross) ¨ ¨The characters grow to accept each others flaws, forging a community around the cathartic experience of Max’s play ¨ ¨ ¨The film uses other parts of the quirky model to avoid overly saddening audiences with its emotionally raw core ¨ ¨It distances the audience from this material by presenting the whole film as if it was a play and not “real-life” events ¨ ¨This involves organizing the story into acts, showcasing highly ordered sets, and centralizing stage production ¨ ¨It also offers a timeless upper-class fantasy of antiquated architecture/interiors, thrift-store chic, and guitar rock ¨ ¨And it depicts its central characters as sub-heroic; their flaws prevent us from being overly invested in their pain ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ 1. How does this film use the Quirky Model ¨aesthetically, narratively, thematically? ¨ ¨2. How did you respond emotionally to the characters and situations in this film? ¨ ¨3. Did you react differently than you did to Rushmore? ¨I feel this film leans more heavily than Rushmore into quirky’s thematic core of human pain and trauma ¨ ¨Here involvement in media arts is portrayed as desperate; as a delusional regression into (unhappy) childhoods ¨ ¨It also replaces the figure of the youthful rebel with that of the emotionally and socially immature (wo)man child ¨ ¨Less single-minded eccentrics, these are awkward people suffering from low self-esteem and few real prospects ¨ ¨This is a sad world of bullying, festering rage, suicide, bereavement, paternal failure, alienation, and suffering ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨The film’s differently constructed artificial look supports its more ironic/less sincere use of the Quirky model ¨ ¨The heritage, wealth, and prestige of Rushmore’s look is replaced by a look that is impoverished, outdated, messy ¨ ¨Unlike Rushmore’s context of privilege, this film prevents its damaged souls from being romanticized as eccentrics ¨ ¨The film balances this bleak content with cute animation, uplifting guitar pop, and a hyper-sincere empathic heroine ¨ ¨It also regulates its tone with increased slapstick comedy, comedy of embarrassment, and taboo-busting comedy ¨ ¨ ¨The emphasis placed on Anderson (and his peers) also risks distorting quirky cinema’s historical trajectory within Anglophone film industries ¨ ¨Granted, the 2000s represented a highly visible and prolific period of Quirky Cinema production, but such films were made before this too ¨ ¨Anderson’s predecessors – Hal Ashby, Stanley Kubrick, Woody Allen, and Milos Foreman – dabbled in quirky cinema in the 1970s and 1980s ¨ ¨Crucially, one of the most visible and celebrated directors of the last forty years has consistently used the Quirky Model: Tim Burton ¨ ¨And, reflecting broader cultural blind-spots about American-branded cinema, the Quirky Model has been used for some major blockbusters ¨ ¨While usually associated with a small group of directors including Wes Anderson, Quirky Cinema is also a longstanding media industry format ¨ ¨The Quirky Model was used by some of Anderson’s directorial peers, but its use in Hollywood also predates their output by at least thirty years ¨ ¨The Quirky Model pairs emotional drama of developmental struggle with a stylized faux-naïve aesthetic and various forms of comedic content ¨ ¨By inviting us to cheer on the characters, and look down on them, quirky cinema oscillations between ironic detachment and sincere engagement ¨ ¨This combination of elements provides an entertainment safe space for folks to reflect on painful life issues without being overwhelmed by them ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨Historically, film makers and marketers have combined the Quirky Model with a sophisticated branding strategy … ¨ ¨Topic: Quirky and Indie Branding ¨ ¨Readings: Newman (2009), Indie Culture. ¨ ¨Home Screenings: Me, Earl, and the Dying Girl (2015) ¨ The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou (2004) ¨ ¨[Preparatory Questions on MS TEAMS and in the Syllabus] ¨ ¨Meeting: Thursday 29 September ¨