Class Observation Czech Cinema April 7, 2015

Appendix: Observing the Czech Cinema class by Richard Stock, Academic Director of CIEE
Richard Stock, Academic Director (rstock@ciee.org)
Faculty Member: Petra Dominkova
Course: Czech Cinema
Semester: Spring 2015
Date: April 7, 2015
Week of the semester: 8
Observer: Rick Stock
Number of students present 13

Descriptions from the observer
Describe the teaching style of the professor, based on this one class example.
• Energetic, social, teaching with students not to them, both discussion and lecture

Describe the atmosphere of the class, based on this one class example.
• Comfortable, entertaining in a good way

Describe the behavior and approach of this group of students, based on this one class example.
• Interested, involved because of implementation of lesson

Outline the structure of this class, what was done when, for how long, and in what order.
• Starts on time
• Logistical issues to 0:05
• 0:05 to 0:45 student presentation
• 0:45 to 1:00 questions from homework assignment
• 1:00 to 1:30 lecture

Along with written comments, assess a number to each of the below items corresponding to the following
scale: 0 = Not Applicable or Not Relevant, 1 = Strongly Agree, 2 = Agree, 3 = Disagree, 4 = Strongly
Disagree.

The professor
The professor exhibited an interest in the material.
• 1

The professor treated students with respect.
• 1, professor clearly wants student involvement

The professor directed the class with authority at the appropriate times and in appropriate ways.
• n/a

The professor was well-prepared for the class and this preparation was clear to students.
• 1

The professor used correct academic English during the class. The professor’s level of English is excellent,
as it should be for teaching in this program.
• 1

The content
The material covered in this class fit well into the overall plan of the course as represented in the syllabus
and also any other smaller units within the semester course. The material also was clearly directed toward
an evaluation in the form of an exam, paper, or other instrument.
• 1
• Class accords to the syllabus plan
• References to midterm papers completed emphasized that the class meeting is linked to evaluations like
this (those to come as well).

The objective of this class was stated, emphasized more than once, and was accomplished.
• n/a, no objective stated

The class
Class time was used well. Class started on time and ended on time (not early or late). Time on task was
reasonably high.
• 1
• Good variety of activities and effectively frequent changing of activities to keep students’ attention.
• However, it was a bit difficult to tell why these parts of the class were together in one session. Especially
the cinematography lecture did not fit, and it did not seem to be clear why it was being addressed in this
class.

The professor used an appropriate amount of interactive teaching methods during the class, at least 30%
of the class time. Interactive methods include interaction between the students and the teacher or among
students.
• 1
• The presentations were required to contain questions for students, so in that way there was studentstudent
interaction, and the professor also asked and responded to questions.

When teaching a discussion, the professor asked good questions, prepared students well for the
discussion, used appropriate wait time, re-directed and otherwise managed the discussion well, etc.
• 1
• Good ad hoc connections were made to parts of the film.

Visual aids were used effectively. If visual aids were used, they were designed and implemented
effectively. If visual aids were not used, they would not have benefitted the class. This includes handouts
as well as things appearing on a screen.
• 1
• Clips were used well: long enough to provide material, but not taking too much class time.

The professor effectively presented material, using good presentation skills such as voice tone, volume,
and variety; physical movement and positioning; eye contact; and exhibited preparation and practice for
the presentation.
• 1

There was a clear value-added to this class meeting. Students gained something they would not be able
to gain by individual reading, consuming other media, or doing out-of-class activities.
• 2
• The discussions were certainly beneficial activities that could not be done outside the classroom.
• However, the lecture on cinematography did not seem to be much better than the students reading the
web page that was used for themselves. This lecture appeared a bit disorganized and seemed to be little
more than reviewing this web page.

The material covered in the class and the assignment completed for the class reflects what is written in the
syllabus, including the weekly schedule.
• 1
• Seems to be exactly on the syllabus plan.

The students
During the class, most of the students were engaged and attentive most of the time.
• 1
• There was quite good participation, only a minority did not speak at all. It seemed to me that this was
mainly due to the effectiveness of the lesson. I think without that this group of students (on this day)
would not participate of their own free will.

During the class, students participated in discussions and activities when the correct context was created
for them.
• 1
• Again, because of the good teaching.

Students were able to show in the class that they had completed the assignment required for that class.
That is, they both did the assignment and also explicitly used that homework in the class (so that it is clear
that they did the assignment).
• 2
• In discussing the films, students could and did show that they watched and understood the films.
• The “small homework” discussion in the middle of the class was not clear what students were supposed
to do or whether they actually did it. It seemed unorganized. It was something about picking a small quote
from the reading, but students were not called on, and at least two of those who responded made other
comments, not quoting from the reading.

Student Evaluation Czech Cinema CIEE Fall 2015

Student Evaluation Czech Cinema CIEE Fall 2015

FAMU International: Flm Style and Form

Film Style and Form

FAMU International, CDM

Spring 2016

Instructor: Petra Dominková, PhD.

Class Time: Thursday 6:10 – 7.40 (FAMU, U3, Lažanský Palais, Smetanovo nábřeží 2)

Contact: petra.dominkova@gmail.com

Office hours: by appointment

Course Description:

The spring term will focus 1/ on sound, often neglected aspect of film style, and 2/ on narration. The students will watch on their own films in their entirety and in class short extracts illustrating particular topics. Discussion is important part of each lesson. Mutual exchange of ideas and artistic experiences enables the students to gain as much inspiration as possible. Students should ask anything that is not clear enough, bring their own ideas and participate actively in the whole course. (The course partially covers the topics for CDM final exam.)

Requirements:
Mid-term essay: 1 000 words

Due date: 24 March 2015

               AND

Final essay: 1 000 words

Due date: 12 May 2015

Students themselves will choose the topic for the paper. Papers have to be typed and may be sent via email. Due date is not negotiable. If a student must request an extension, she/he has to do it before the paper is due. All sources (films, books, articles, interviews, websites etc) have to be cited: any time student quotes or paraphrases someone else’s work she/he has to give her/him credit, otherwise it is understood as plagiarism, that is unaceptable and will cause student‘s failing from the assignmnet and may lead to failing from the overall course as well.

Presentation

A presentation based on the film and reading. The student will lead the discussion about the film we watched. This involves preparing a handout or PWP and creating discussion questions for the group. (Send me the handout at least 24 hours before the class begins!) The goal is to get us talking about the certain traits of film style and how it demonstrates itself in the particular film. The discussion should last 30 - 45 minutes.

Grading will be based on three aspects:

Participation in discussion: 33.3%

plus TWO from the following assignments (based on each student’s choice):

Midterm Essay: 33.3%

Final Essay: 33.3%

Presentation: 33.3%

Grading Table

Grade	percent	1000 points	333 points
A	100-96	1000-960	333-320
A –	95-90	959-900	321-300
B+	89-87	899-870	299-290
B	86-83	869-830	289-276
B –	82-80	829-800	275-267
C+	79-76	799-760	266-253
C	75-70	759-700	252-233
D	69-60	699-600	232-200
F	59-0	599-0	199-0

1.        (February 11)

Sound: Introduction

2.                 (February 18)

The Functions of Dialogue in Narrative Film

Reading: Bordwell, Thompson, 269-298 + Kozloff (2000), 33-63.

Discussion: Money  (L’Argent, Robert Bresson, France, 1983, 85’)

3.                 (February 25)

Dialogue in Melodrama

Reading: Kozloff (2000), 235-266.

Discussion: The Umbrellas of Cherbourg (Les parapluis de Cherbourg, J. Demmy, France, 1964, 91’)

4.                 (March 3)

Dance Music

Reading: Hexel.

Discussion: Run, Lola, Run  (Lola rennt, Tom Tykwer, Germany, 1998, 81’)

5.                 (March 10)

Class canceled (make-up will take place May-12 9.15-10.45 pm at Café Nona)

6.                 (March 17) 

Musique concrète

Reading: Koizumi.

Discussion: Pitfall  (Otoshiana, Hiroshi Teshigahara, Japan, 1962, 97’)

7.                 (March 24)

Noise and silence

Reading: Nardelli

Discussion: The Night (La Notte, Michelangelo Antonioni, Italy, 1961)

8.                 (March 31)

Point of Audition

Reading: Coyle

Discussion: Cloverfield (Matt Reeves, USA, 2008, 85’)

9.       (April 7)

Narration: Introduction

Reading: Bordwell, Thompson, 78-101.

Discussion: Witness (A tanú, Péter Bacsó, Hungary, 1969, 105’)

10.     (April 14)

Point of View

Reading: Branigan

Discussion: Being John Malkovich (Spike Jonze, USA, 1999, 112’)

11.     (April 21)

Spectator in the Text

Reading: Browne

Discussion: Stagecoach (John Ford, USA, 1939, 96’)

12.     (April 28)

Network Narratives

Reading: Bordwell (2008)

Discussion: Babel (Alejandro Gonzáles Iñárritu, France/USA/Mexico, 2006, 143’)

13.     (May 5)

Voice-over narration: First-person narrator

Reading: Kozloff (1989), 41-71 + Brickman.

Discussion: Badlands  (Terrence Malick, USA, 1973, 94’)

14.     (May 12)

Voice-over narration: Third-person narrator

Reading: Kozloff (1989), 72-102.

Discussion: The Naked City (Jules Dassin, USA, 1948, 96’)

PLUS

Feedback (May 12; 8.30-10 pm; Café Nona)

Readings:

Bordwell, David, and Kristin Thompson. Film Art. An Introduction. McGraw-Hill, 2010. 78-101, 269-298.

Bordwell, David. ”Mutual Friends and Chronologies of Chance.” Poetics of Cinema. New York and London: Routledge, 2008. 189-250.

Branigan, Edward. “The Point of View Shot.” Movies and Methods, vol. II. Ed. by Bill Nichols. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1985. 672-691.

Brickman, Barbara Jane. “Coming of Age in the 1970s: Revision, Fantasy, and Rage in the Teen-Girl Badlands.” Camera Obscura 22:66 (September 2007), 24-59.

Browne, Nick. “The Spectator-in-the-Text: The Rhetoric of Stagecoach.” Film Quarterly 29.2 (Winter 1975-76): 26-38.  (see http://faculty.washington.edu/cbehler/glossary/browneSpec.html)

Coyle, Rebecca. “Point of Audition. Sound and Music in Cloverfield.” Science Fiction Film and Television 3:2 (2010), 217-238.

Hexel, Vasco. “The use of dance music and the synergy of narrative vehicles in Run Lola Run.” The Soundtrack 3.2, 83-96.

Koizumi, Kyoko. “Creative Soundtrack Expression. Tôru Takemitsu’s Score for Kwaidan.” Genre, Music, and Sound: Terror Tracks: Music, Sound, and Horror Cinema. Ed. by Philip Hayward. London: Equinox Publishing Ltd., 2009. 88-100.

Kozloff, Sarah. Invisible Storytellers: Voice-Over Narration in American Fiction Film. University of California Press, 1989. 41-102.

Kozloff, Sarah. Overhearing Film Dialogue. Ewing, NJ: University of California Press, 2000. 33-63, 235-266.

Nardelli, Matilde. “Some reflections on Antonioni, sound, and the silence of La Notte.” The Soundtrack 3:1 (2010), 11-23.

NYU/FAMU: Topics from (Czech and) European Film History

New York University

Tisch School of the Arts

Course Sylabus

TOPICS FROM (CZECH AND) EUROPEAN FILM HISTORY

Spring 2016

Monday 9:00-11:25 a.m. + Wednesday 10:40 a.m. -12.15 p.m.

Instructor Name: Petra Dominkova, PhD.

Course Objectives:

The aim of the course is to make students familiar with some of the innovative moments in the history of Czech (and East European) cinema. The subject will be presented within the historical, political, and cultural contexts. The historical facts and artistic/theoretical ideas will be accompanied by specific examples. During the sessions students will watch films in their entirety (with English subtitles) or short extracts illustrating particular topic.

Requirements:

Final Test: five questions about topics and films which were discussed in class.

Participation in discussions: Student are expected to vividly participate in dicsussions.

Presentation: A presentation based on a film seen within the class and the required reading. Sudent will prepare PWP and/or handout. Presentation should last at least 45 minutes and should include at least 5 discussion questions. Send me your presentation ahead – until Sunday

evening – to I can provide you with the feedback.

Evaluation:

Final test: 35%

Participation in discussion: 32,5%

Presentation: 32,5%

Class meetings:

Monday: Klimentská;

Wednesday FAMU main building classroom no. 7

Contact:

e-mail: petra.dominkova@gmail.cz

office hours: by appointment

tel: +420 739 053 950

Week 1 MON, February 1

Theme:

Introduction + Chronology; Mise-en-scene

Week 1 WED, February 3

Screening: Ida, dir. Pawel Pawlikowski (Poland, 2013, 82’)

Week 2 MON, February 8

Discussion: Ida (discuss particularly Mise-en-scene)

Reading: Elsaesser, Thomas and Warren Buckland. Studying Contemporary American Film: A Guide To Movie Analysis. London: Arnold and New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. 80-106. Print. (Chapter Mise-en-scène Criticism and Statistical Style Analysis (The English patient).)

Theme: WW2 and Holocaust in East European cinema: various approaches

Closely Watched Trains, dir. Jiří Menzel (1967); Shop on the Main Street, dir. Elmar Klos + Ján Kadár (1965); Protector, dir. Marek Najbrt (2009), etc.

Week 2 WED, February 10

Screening: Daisies , dir. Věra Chytilová (Sedmikrásky, Czech Republic, 1966, 74’)

Editing

Week 3 MON, February 15

Discussion: Daisies (discuss particularly Editing)

Reading: Lim, Bliss Cua. “Dolls in Fragments: Daisies as Feminist Allegory.” Camera Obscura 16.2: 36–77. Print.

Theme: Female filmmakers in Eastern Europe. Věra Chytilová, Ildiko Enyedi, Agnieszka Holland

Various films by the directors mentioned above.

Week 3 WED, February 17

Screening: Firemen’s Ball, dir. Miloš Forman (Hoří, má panenko, Czech republic, 1969, 71’)

Framing

Week 4 MON, February 22

Discussion: Firemen’s Ball (discuss particularly Framing)

Reading: Branigan, Edward. Approaches to Semiotics (AS): Point of View in the Cinema. Tubingen, DEU: Walter de Gruyter, 2012. 39–72. Print.

Theme: Czechoslovak New Wave I: Inspirations. French Nouvelle Vague, Italian neorealism, etc.

Les quatre cents coups, dir. François Truffaut (1959); Cléo de 5 à 7, dir. Agnès Varda (1962); Ladri di biciclette, dir. Vittorio De Sica (1948)

Week 4 WED, February 24

Screening: Happiness, dir. Agnés Varda (Le Bonheur, France, 1965, 79’) + Color

Week 5 MON, February 29

Discussion: Happiness (discuss particularly Color)

Reading: DeRoo,Rebecca J. “Unhappily ever after: visual irony and feminist strategy in Agnès Varda’s Le Bonheur.” Studies in French Cinema 8:3 (September 2008): 189–209. Print.

Theme: Czechoslovak New Wave II: Poetics and Politics

Cremator, dir. Juraj Herz (1968); Joke, dir. Jaromil Jireš (1969)

Week 5 WED, March 2

Theme: The 1970s and 1980s

Week 6 MON, March 28

Theme: Experimental Films / Jan Švankmajer + Sound

Czech experimental films + short films by J. Švankmajer

Week 6 WED, March 30

Screening: Conspirators of Pleasure; dir. Jan Švankmajer (Spiklenci slasti, Czech Republic, 1996, 85’)

Week 7 MON, April 4

Discussion: Conspirators of Pleasure (discuss particularly Sound)

Reading: Jackson, Wendy. “The Surrealist Conspirator: An Interview with jan Svankmajer.” Animation World Magazzine 2:3 (June 1997): n. pag. Web. 15 August 2014 <http://www.awn.com/mag/issue2.3/issue2.3pages/2.3jacksonsvankmajer.html>.

Shaviro, Steven. “Conspirators of Pleasure.” The Pinocchio Theory 11 Feb 2007: n. pag. Web. 20 July 2014 <http://www.shaviro.com/Blog/?p=555>.

Theme: Preparation for final test.

Screening: Taxidermia; dir. György Pálfi (Hungary, 2006, 91’)

Week 7 WED, April 6

Discussion: Taxidermia; dir. György Pálfi (Hungary, 2006, 91’)

Reading: Shaviro, Steven. “Body Horror and Post-Socialist cinema: György Pálfi’s Taxidermia.” A Companion to Eastern European Cinemas. Ed. Aniko Imré. Chichester, U.K. ; Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishing, 2012. 25–40. Print. (Also at Web. 20 July 2014 <http://www.shaviro.com/Othertexts/Taxidermia.pdf>)

Week 8 MON, May 2

Final Test

Week 8 WED, May 4

Discussion about the class

Readings:

Branigan, Edward. Approaches to Semiotics (AS): Point of View in the Cinema. Tubingen, DEU: Walter de Gruyter, 2012. 39–72. Print.

DeRoo,Rebecca J. “Unhappily ever after: visual irony and feminist strategy in Agnès Varda’s Le Bonheur.” Studies in French Cinema 8:3 (September 2008): 189–209. Print.

Elsaesser, Thomas and Warren Buckland. Studying Contemporary American Film: A Guide To Movie Analysis. London: Arnold and New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. 80-106. Print. (Chapter Mise-en-scène Criticism and Statistical Style Analysis (The English patient).)

Jackson, Wendy. “The Surrealist Conspirator: An Interview with jan Svankmajer.” Animation World Magazzine 2:3 (June 1997): n. pag. Web. 15 August 2014 <http://www.awn.com/mag/issue2.3/issue2.3pages/2.3jacksonsvankmajer.html>.

Lim, Bliss Cua. “Dolls in Fragments: Daisies as Feminist Allegory.” Camera Obscura 16.2: 36–77. Print.

Shaviro, Steven. “Body Horror and Post-Socialist cinema: György Pálfi’s Taxidermia.” A Companion to Eastern European Cinemas. Ed. Aniko Imré. Chichester, U.K. ; Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishing, 2012. 25–40. Print. (Also at Web. 20 July 2014 <http://www.shaviro.com/Othertexts/Taxidermia.pdf>)

Shaviro, Steven. “Conspirators of Pleasure.” The Pinocchio Theory 11 Feb 2007: n. pag. Web. 20 July 2014 <http://www.shaviro.com/Blog/?p=555>.