Once upon a Midnight in Paris:
A Formalist’s Approach
Main Argument
The Formalist approach to cinema criticism can shed more light on what’s really going on in Midnight in Paris than any other form of movie analysis. In true Formalist fashion, I will look at one key scene, and extrapolate the meaning and effect it has on the rest of the film and on the audience.
Claim #1
I believe the crux of the film can be found in the director’s choices in the scene with Salvador Dali.
Support for Claim #1
The scene with Salvador Dali.
Claim #2
The director is trying to make the audience contemplate Film as an art form, by cinematically showing that Film can capture life more so than any painting.
Support for Claim #2
“No painting can capture Paris” scene. Dali scene.
Claim #3
Woody Allen chooses to create a sense of duality throughout the film. The effect is that there is two movies, one for two different audiences.
Support for Claim #3
“You inhabit two worlds, simultaneously” Dali Scene. Painting vs Film. 2 Times periods. Rhinoceros metaphor.
So What?
The audience can take away whatever meaning they want to take from the movie, and there is nothing wrong with that.
Good. I especially like claim #3. I would consider making this your most forceful argument (perhaps not leaving it at the end). But, that is just a suggestion. Also, the first part of your conclusion is strong, but you are bringing ethics into the 2nd part with "there is nothing wrong with that," and I would consider changing this assertion to: the possibility to take away different meanings actually makes the art work more artful.
ReplyDelete