Methodology III: Return of the Jedi

A Methodological Refresh

Hello, darlings, and welcome to our new home!

I am very grateful for those who have already subscribed here and those who have clicked through to this new site. Black and White and Read All Over will be the forever home of Review Roulette from now on, so please subscribe here and feel free to unsubscribe from Substack!

Not to get too into it, but Substack has been engaging in activities that I (and my husband, Ben Railton) do not condone, so Ben and I decided to make a site together to host our public scholarship (and yours!). Please have a little jaunt around our site and, again, subscribe if you like Review Roulette, Ben’s AmericanStudier blog, or his #ScholarSunday threads pointing you to many other fantastic scholars and their work!

And please also admire the penguin. I am most proud of the penguin.

So, to reintroduce Review Roulette, I thought this week we’d throw it a little housewarming party by refreshing the methodology. This week also coincides with the 2nd(!!!) anniversary of Review Roulette AND the 76th or so film review, so it’s time for a little addition to the wheel.

Here on Review Roulette, each week I pick a film I want to watch from the 20th century and then spin a wheel populated with the approaches outlined below. The winning approach dictates how I watch the film, prompting me to really actively watch the film so that later when I’m sitting with my thoughts about it, I can analyze it more deeply. This process is truly, deeply fun.

I wrote these words in “2 Method 2 Ology” for our last refresh and they still hold true:

I am so grateful that you read my little words and thoughts each week and engage in some luscious critical thinking with me. It truly is a highlight of my week to get to watch a movie and just think about it, just sit with my thoughts and feelings and pick apart the film until I get closer to both it and myself – what a beautiful opportunity to remember the gifts and depths of my humanity. And I am so grateful to share this meditative process with you all in the hope that you, too, will take a moment to get closer to the beautiful complexity of thought that forms your informed opinions if only for one film, one episode, one reel a week.

Review Roulette sincerely is a passion project of mine, and it is an honor to get to encourage media literacy in a way that (I think) is thought provoking, challenging, sometimes funny, and hopefully fun for you all, as I know it is for me.

So, the refresh!

I want to add a few approaches to our methods. The below glossary outlines the approaches and offers some sample questions using the film I have written the most about, Frank Capra’s It’s a Wonderful Life (1946), to demonstrate how the approach works in practice. On our first refresh, I added a few, but we can always evolve and do better, so this time, let’s add:

1. Comparative
2. The Disciplinary Approach

---

Glossary of Approaches

Actor’s Oeuvre –

The actor’s oeuvre approach is not dissimilar to the auteur approach below in that we look at the body of work of an artist. This approach can go in two directions. Firstly, star power. There’s a reason Tom Cruise and Tom Hanks and Tom Holland and other actors not named Tom are such identifiable Hollywood figures. Star power is a very real thing when it comes to the producibility, marketability, and profitability of a film, so for our analysis we could think about why an actor was cast in a certain role and what they bring to the film outside of their performance. Secondly, we could think about how their own biographical details and life experience impact their performances, how a particular film fits into their larger filmography, or what elements of their acting style are signature, unique to them.

• How did Jimmy Stewart’s recent experiences at war impact his performance in It’s a Wonderful Life? How does the role of George Bailey compare to Stewart’s earlier Jefferson Smith?

Apparatus –

The apparatus approach is probably the most heavily theoretical one on this list, and it is just unfortunate that it is first alphabetically (edit: not anymore!), but let’s break this down. In essence, the apparatus approach starts from the perspective that all films are ideological, by which I mean a creation of the cultural, social, political, economic, societal, temporal, etc. moment in which they are made, reflecting some semblance of reality from that moment.

This theory comes from Marxist theories on culture and structures of society. Many have weighed in here; my preference is for Louis Althusser. (Stick with me.) Althusser outlines something called the Ideological State Apparatus (as well as the Repressive State Apparatus (think police, army, National Guard in the US, the structures or organizations in society that uphold the laws of the ruling power)). The Ideological State Apparatus is the network of other structures in society that teach individuals how to be individuals as well as citizens and therefore a collective nation. These ideological structures, then, include but are not limited to education (especially state-run), organized religions, news media, and entertainment media, the places where students, congregants, or viewers develop their perspectives as both individuals and members of a group. So we have this idea of the Ideological State Apparatus as cultural and civic conveyors, and we also have this understanding of society as led by the most powerful group, the “State” (which, for all intents and purposes, Althusser and I believe we should view as the most powerful group and not necessarily solely the government (because we live in a corporatist society in which the billionaires have the power to, on a whim, disrupt a massive military operation and the government has no power to stop them (but I digress))).

(I promise this is the longest one and the rest are not like this).

Where the apparatus film approach comes in is we take this idea that cinema (as entertainment media) and Hollywood (as one of the largest cultural sectors in not only the US, but also the world) are powerful creators and purveyors of ideology. Through films, our identity as Americans, our prevailing views on cultural topics, our competing values, our struggles, our differences, our faults and successes and everything in between are portrayed through artistic media, never uniform and never singular, but always plural, always in conversation with one another and always reflecting some aspect of our very varied society. So, as film critics, we take this given starting place that films are ideological and that the audience are members of the reality in which these films were made, and we look at what structures in society our film is commenting on, what about the apparatuses of society is being critiqued or questioned or challenged or praised. We examine the film’s portrayal of the aspects of society, that the audience understands as normal, dominant ideas and structures of that society, and we think about what the intent behind that portrayal was on screen.

• What stance does It’s a Wonderful Life take on capitalism? How does the film engage prevailing attitudes towards the banking system? Why was the FBI concerned about It’s a Wonderful Life as potentially subversive communist ideology, and are these claims supported by the film?

Auteur –

This approach is concerned with the director’s influence on the film. All film scholars and enthusiasts know that it takes hundreds of hands and minds to make, market, and view a film, so why do we boil it down to the director so frequently? Some people have different opinions, but throughout Hollywood history, there have always been stand-out directors who exerted signature styles over their films and worked with portrayals of certain tropes, perspectives, themes, and actors, none more distinctively than in the New Hollywood era of the 1960s through the budding Blockbuster era of the 70s with your Spielbergs, Lucases, and Scorseses. We very much have some stand outs now as well with types including Wes Anderson, Christopher Nolan, and Greta Gerwig who have such distinctive styles and overwhelming hallmarks stamped on their films to quickly identify it as their own.

So, to take an Auteur approach to film is to consider how this film was influenced by the director as the ultimate “author” of the film, the person whose name is above the title (Capra reference for my 30s/40s nerds) and who gets all the fame and blame after reviews.

• How does It’s a Wonderful Life fit into the other works of Capra? How might his life as an Italian-American immigrant influence the portrayal of the promises of the American Dream? Does Capra’s recent military service factor into the making of this film?

Comparative –

A comparative approach situates a film in relation to other films for any reason. Maybe the film you’re analyzing reminds you of Pee-wee’s Big Adventure (1985). Is that anything? Does thinking about the similarities or differences between Citizen Kane (1941) and Pee-wee’s Big Adventure do anything for how you read Kane? Maybe. It’s worth thinking about because culture is fluid, media is always in conversation with other realities, and genuine reader response is always valid. So comparative lets you get weird with it.

• When put in conversation with The Best Years of Our Lives (1946), how does It’s a Wonderful Life reflect a response to WWII? How do the two films react to national trauma? (This is a specific comparative analysis I make in my book!)

Disciplinary –

A disciplinary approach is when the analyst approaches the film from their own professional perspective, not as a “film critic” (whatever that means). When this approach comes up, I will review it from the view of a classicist, i.e. my original academic training. That in itself is a broad term, so I will engage classical reception methods specifically adapted for reading modern texts (potentially divorced from classics), which means I will look at elements of the film with cultural touchstones from previous periods for how those touchstones introduce depth to the film. This approach is part of a work-in-progress that I will divulge more of in time.

• How does It’s a Wonderful Life use the song “Buffalo Gals” and how has that aged, culturally? Is George Bailey a comic hero (in the Greek sense)?

Dualist –

A dualist approach considers dichotomies in a film that can be reflective of opposites in reality, society, or human nature. These dichotomies are contrasting themes that might include but are not limited to good vs. evil, light vs. dark, urban vs. rural, and wealth vs. poverty.

• What is the dichotomy between George (the lovable hero and small-town banker) and Mr. Potter (the miserly, monopolizing banker who owns half the town)? Does this personal relationship between the two men offer a larger critique on the structures and morals of financial systems in our own world?

Formalist –

Formalist approaches analyze the technical composition of a film. Technical aspects are also called the cinematography of a film, or the art of making a motion picture and capturing a story on film. Cinematography includes the shot composition (how does the scene look, what were the intentions of the set design, what is the lighting doing in this scene?) as well as the score (music), use of color, and editing of the film. Analyzing the film as a technical achievement looks heavily at the production of the film while also considering the story and the form the film takes in portraying the film.

• How is the set design of Mr. Potter’s office a reflection of his character and the power dynamics he exploits to maintain control? How does Capra use close-up shots to convey intense emotions within the film? How (in the color version) do the colors of characters’ outfits convey their ambition and wealth statuses?

Genre –

· The generic approach looks at the wider cohort of films that share storytelling characteristics, tropes, and motifs. Some popular genres include musicals, Westerns, film noir, action, and rom-coms. The linking factors of genre can be varied, manipulated, purely formulaic, tangential, or stereotypical of the category a film is classified as. We can look at how a film fits in with the genre it claims to be, or we can subvert that and argue a film is a different (or multiple) genre(s) from the stated or inferred genre from the marketing. (Genre, when you really start breaking it down, is a very loose category of films that we rely on to typify and organize our discussions about, as well as our expectations for, films with vague or explicit connections between one another. However, it is also a very helpful way of exploring the different approaches within a prescribed genre and how films can express themselves individually while belonging to a larger cohort).

• How does It’s a Wonderful Life live up to its advertising as a rom-com? In what ways does this film fit into the wider corpus of populist cinema? What are the generic touchstones within this film that signal it is a populist film?

Historical –

Viewing a film historically can be one of two things (or both if you want!).

2. Feminist – A feminist reading will examine the gender dynamics within the film, particularly around the portrayal and treatment of women-presenting or -coded characters.

• How are Mary and Violet portrayed in the film as competing types of women? How and why is Violet’s implicit sexualization and implied promiscuity used to mar her character? Can Mary be read as the true hero of the film? (Yes.)

3. Marxist – As mentioned above under Apparatus, that too is rooted in Marxist theory concerning the reflections of societal structures on film and in connection to the audience. Applying an ideological Marxist approach is thinking about ideas of class and wealth and other social (as in class-tangential) constructs of society amid the plot and characters and filmed world.

• What is the financial disparity between Pottersville and Bedford Falls, and further, what are the moral implications of the town’s fiscal transformation? How are the wealthier characters portrayed similarly or differently from those less fortunate? Why is George’s rant about “a couple-a decent rooms and a bath” such a god damn banger? (Look it up if you don’t know what I’m talking about).

4. Queer – While queer theory can of course be used to look at LGBTQIA+ identities in film, it is also a much wider category of anything that is outside of heteronormativity and the structures of society inherent to that. What I mean by that is anything that is perceived as breaking or outside of the predominant ways of interacting with society, other individuals, and the natural world.

• How is George’s reluctance to get married and hesitancy to settle down portrayed in the film? Is George a queer character throughout the entirety of the film for these views, or does he assimilate into a normative lifestyle? How is Mr. Potter’s lack of a family (and, crucially, children) depicted in the film? How do the environmental changes between Bedford Falls and Pottersville insinuate desired relationships with the natural world?

5. Racial & Ethnic – Viewing a film through this lens prompts analysis of the race-based structures within a film as well as the relationships between different ethnic groups. This approach in Review Roulette will mostly be used to analyze how and why white tends to be the default race in Hollywood films, especially in the 20^th century, and how that idea is toxically implicit in these films.

• How is Annie, the Baileys’ maid, portrayed in this film as the only black person? What is Annie’s relationship to the white characters in the film? How is Mr. Potter’s xenophobia direct and indirect in the film and what does this say in opposition to George’s inclusivity? What is the film saying by portraying the archetypical American (George) and his family as lower-middle class white people?

Reception –

Reception studies look at how a film was received by the audience. Reception generally is about the contemporary audience, but it can be about any time, so I find this one interesting for thinking about the longevity of films. Many of the approaches on this list tend toward the production and content of films, but reception studies lean more into the life the film takes on after release.

• How did a 1946 audience react to It’s a Wonderful Life? How and why did a 70s audience help the film to become an American Christmas classic?

Score & Sound Mixing –

Score and sound mixing are technically part of the formalist approach, but I want to make it a specific category for Review Roulette. I don’t think enough about scores in context of films, but I do listen to film scores regularly as I work, and I would like to rectify the context I’ve made for them. Scores (original music made for a film) and soundtracks (all the music in the film, original or not) guide our emotional responses to films and frame story elements with auditory clues as to how they relate to other people, plots, or parts of the film. And I’m putting scores and soundtracks together with sound mixing for ease of thinking about the auditory signals in films. So, for this approach, we will be thinking about how the music and/or sound mixing in a film impacts our experience and the story.

• How does the repetition of “Buffalo Gals” (lyrical and instrumental versions) frame the romance between George and Mary? How do the sounds of train whistles and car horns frame George’s story throughout the film?

Textual –

Textual analyses here on Review Roulette look at the script of the film. This one requires specificity in its definition, so bear with me.

Analyzing a film is like reading that film as a text. In film criticism, films that we are analyzing are referred to as film texts, and so the analytical process is commonly called textual analysis. Every review on Review Roulette is technically a textual analysis/criticism because we are analyzing the film text. When I say “read a film as a text”, I mean in the way a high school student may be prompted to read The Great Gatsby or Macbeth: breaking the text down into its constituent parts to understand it more deeply. What does the green light at the end of Gatsby’s dock symbolize? What is the role of the witches and how does the introduction of supernatural elements impact the story of Macbeth? A textual analysis is one that is critical of the cultural text you are reading, watching, listening to, or otherwise engaging with. That’s the contextual and colloquial definition to film studies. 

On Review Roulette, though, I want to take “textual” literally to look at the words of a film, so we are using that definition. Some films have intertitles guiding the story, particularly silent films, and most films have a script of text. So, for a textual analysis, we’ll look at the monologues, dialogues, overlapping tirades, single sentences, or sections of speech that deserve a deeper look.

• How does George’s sentiment about wanting “to do something big, something important” change throughout the film? How does the definition of success change for George the moment Potter asks him if he is afraid of it?