Essay 1

Just like literary theory, film theory carries a variety of established approaches to examine films. Ideological approach considers the culture elements, worldview of people, and social values within a film, and thus can be interweaved with other theories, e.g. feminist theory and Marxist theory, to analyze one or more films for the visions created. On the other hand, formalist approach evaluates a film in and of itself, the mise-en-scene, editing, style, etc. This approach builds up an analysis of the film based on what is presented, as opposed to being mainly about the connections of the messages to the outside world. 

Argument: I believe that the formalist approach is more organic approach when compared to the ideological approach, since the analysis is built upon precisely what the director has chosen. We cannot know the intentions or beliefs of the scriptwriter or the director; but we could utilize the motifs, mise-en-scene, and other formal structures to create connections to support our interpretations. 

Claim One: In order to convey the (present) characters’ notions on nostalgia, Paris, and ideal way of life, Woody Allen uses not only dialogue but also standing positions to discuss the degree of openness and idealism in each character. This set up prepares us to explore an alternative world with Gil, and understand the present day events in which Inez, her parents, and her friends resist Paris

Example: For instance, after Inez blurts out that Gil works at a nostalgia shop, the screen is as follows: Gil on the distant left, Inez on the distant right, Paul’s back is toward us and Carol is close to Paul and Inez, but also in the distance. Paul asks the question, “so which era would you live in?” He is the largest character on screen. The positioning makes the audience feel that we’re watching and awaiting the response of three disciples – Gil and Inez are in the same group, and will defend their answer; and Carol doesn’t have anything to ask or attack so she doesn’t stand near Paul, nor is she on the team of Gil and Inez. Of course, later she is but a weak barrier to prevent Inez and Paul from having an affair. 

Claim Two: The styles of shooting the present Paris and past Paris idealizes the notion of migration, creating a fantasy for Gil and the audience. Alternatively, the present day Paris can either hold no charm to other characters, or be experienced vicariously and superficially.

Example: color of film stock, use of night time; day time signifying a clear mind and resistance to romantic ideas, and for a character like Inez’s dad, he is either inside in a restaurant or outside on a top floor. Carol often takes snapshots of her surroundings, but her photos are taken too quickly to argue that the act of photography is any more than a lie, some proof that she is experiencing Paris.

Support: Braudy, The Apparatus – what is presented in front of us, whether real or not

Claim Three: The motif of rain in this film signifies a vision attached to disillusionment, which is the underlying theme in the film.

Example: when Gil raves about Paris in the beginning, it’s because he doesn’t want to live in America anymore.

Midnight In Paris

I will admit, the only other Woody Allen film I’ve ever watched is Vicky Cristina Barcelona, and I could not pretend to have an opinion on his quirkiness or his “regular” style. Many critics hailed Midnight In Paris as one of his hits, and it’s well known that the French adore this film. Why wouldn’t they? Paris is portrayed in its most glorious and romantic – the arts and rich history are given great attention, the plot is light and funny – and for us general American audiences, the familiar faces as Owen Wilson and Rachel McAdams push the Allen name into an approachable category. 

As beautiful and popular as the film has been, I do not think its main purpose was simply toward commercial or Academy success. The theme of disillusion pervades this film in the characters and setting of the present and past. The numerous American authors featured in this film are known as the Lost Generation, a term famously coined by Gertrude Stein herself. These Americans felt that life after WWI was horrifying, the moral guidelines that Americans followed in fighting the war didn’t return blessings, and that America was becoming ever more materialistic and unspiritual. This cohort of authors lived in Paris in the 20s for it offered entertainment and a safe ground for idealism. The nostalgic parts of the film used darker and warmer colors, as well as the night life and its inherent decadence, to render a most romantic and accepting picture of Paris. Paris seemed perfect for these literary geniuses and those artists beginning to form their ideas. And Gil himself, who many critics identified as the “Woody surrogate” for his “idealization of the past, of the Paris that represented art and life at their fullest” which Allen shared, also undergoes disillusionment on several levels (Travers). From the very start of the film, he expresses a desire to escape his Hollywood writer life, and questions how one should live. He is very similar in this way to the Lost Generation who explorer the meaning of life and believing Paris offers answers. When Gil went with Adriana to an even earlier Golden Age, he decides that the fantasy in returning to a resplendent past is futile and cyclical. 

Is his decision to start anew in Paris just another deception, fantasy, escape? The film concludes in a traditional Hollywood way, leaving us a beautiful and seemingly well rounded ending. But here is where I think the most important exposure comes in. The gorgeous opening scene is almost four minutes long, and probably what leads many to call this film Allen’s love letter to Paris. I have never been to Paris, and in many films Paris is definitely portrayed similarly. But from the assertions of those who have visited, it appears that the weather in Paris is hardly ever so obliging. Isn’t this an obvious sign that the rest of the film, in all its glamor and excitement, is just a continuation of this glossy, colorful edited photography? I had already pointed out that the past Paris is intentionally brilliantly portrayed as well. Paris is the best city in the world because the Lost Generation believed it to be, because Gil believes it to be, and now these editing techniques lead us in that direction as well. The film is a combination of reality and fantasy featuring both Gil’s modern life and his travels to the past, and I think while the opening scene could be a red herring and lead us to be skeptical of the intentions of the filmmaker and the author’s plot and deceit within, does that actually mean we couldn’t use film as a means to experience escape and illusion?

Travers' Review in the Rolling Stone