politics and european film post 1960 - any ideas for my seminar?

a friend and i are applying to conduct a student-run seminar at ubc, which seems to be a fun way to earn credit by making up your own readings and assignments.  our chosen topic, being double majors in poli sci and modern european studies, is politics and european film post 1960. 

im asking, begging, whatevering you for suggestions. 

so far, ive got:
1. italy:  something by pasolini:  oedipus rex, hawks and sparrows, love meetings
2. france: something by godard: vladimir and rosa, germany year 90 nine zero, our music
3. uk: boyle's/welsh's trainspotting.
4. czech republic:  remunda & klusak's cesky sen/czech dream
5. ussr:  tarkovsky's my name is ivan
6. germany:  wender's the american friend
7. spain:  something by almodovar:  what have i done to deserve this?, pepi luci bom and other girls like mom
8. denmark: vinterberg's the celebration
9. yugoslavia: kusturica's do you remember dolly bell?

a brief/shitty ainge-style summary of each film can be found by clicking "continue reading" at the end of this post.

draft version of the course blurb:  european film (1960-present) and its political context. we will examine the political history and political theory behind the films we study. our aim is to use european films of this era to understand the intersection of art and politics and to investigate any problems posed by presenting politics in an aesthetic form. most theorists would agree that you cant ever divorce the two. walter benjamin believed all art was political, and that accepting certain political tendencies means that you inevitably accept certain literary tendencies. theodor adorno, who wrote largely in response to the modern art movement and the nazis merging of politics and aesthetics, was suspicious of consciousness-raising political art. he is caught between hegel's theory that art cannot truly survive in a capitalist context and marx's belief that art is going to propel the revolution. though he believes history and political domination affect most artistic output, he maintains that art should be judged on two levels: hermeneutic (appreciating it for its form/cultural function) and empirical (analysing it in its social and political context/social function). both these need to be understood in conjunction with eachother and not separately as the cultural function and the social function determine one another. the cultural aspect of the artwork has to successfully work out its own contradictions before it can go on to expose society's flaws - for example, is avant-garde art necessarily progressive by nature? most artists want to believe that their art will shake us out of our complacency, so it isnt a stretch to imply that most art is politically motivated.

oedipus rex (italy. pasolini, 1967) - this film opens the gender door since its got the oedipal story running through it. this story relates to pasolini's life as he felt alienated from his military father and disturbingly close to his mother whom he idolized. pasolini was a controversial political figure in italy - his poems, articles, and films irked everyone from the church to the marxists to the state. the constant switching in scenes between the 20th century and classical greece also raises questions about europe's relation to the classics in the postmodern era. another pasolini we could do: hawks and sparrows, 1966: its about two dudes who talk to a bird and then turn into monks for st francis who preach to hawks and sparrows. it's a diatribe about political and moral idealism. we could also do 'love meetings' (1968) which is a documentary about italians and their views on sexuality - he concludes the poor in the south are openly medieval and the rich in the north are silent and repressed. pasolini was constantly targeted for being a homosexual.

godard - vladimir and rosa (france. dziga vertov, 1970) - this is about the chicago eight trial. the judge is characterized as kind of a wanker who spends time idly doodling and looking at pinup girls, and the chicago eight represent facets of french revolutionary society. lenin and rosa are in the movie and they - guess what - try to stir up some revolution. other godard we could do (hes part of dziga vertov): just great, 1972: it traces a couple in paris and raises questions about the media and revolutions and whether they do anything for ideology. its pretty satirical and he comes down hard on the 1968 student rebellions. also, we could do 'germany year 90 nine zero', 1991, which is godard's vision for germany post berlin wall, inspired by deconstructivism. or 'our music', 2004, which is analyzes modernity in three acts - heaven, purgatory, and hell.

trainspotting (great britain. boyle, based on irvine welsh's novel, 1996) - apathy and youth in britain. rentons attitude towards the nhs as being a source of free drugs and his rant about his scottish identity can instigate debate about welsh's portrayal of britain. rentons drop-out approach to life makes him seem like a victim but he really is in control of where his life is going, hes just too apathetic to give a damn. are these guys alienated by capitalism or victims of the welfare state and its design for life?

cesky sen (czech republic. klusak & remunda, 2003) - i have this on dvd, which is good, cos i dont think its available anywhere. if anyone asks, its a legal copy i got on a jaunt to the czech republic and not some film i stole with the help of my unscrupulous russian boyfriend. this film is about a fake walmart opening organized by two film students just so they can see how czechs went from being oppressed commie denizens to consumerists with dollar signs for eyes. they interview all kinds of czechs, ranging from ad agency scumbags to regular people.

my name is ivan (ussr, tarkovsky. 1962) - this is a world war ii movie, but it is unlike most other war movies because it doesnt show any germans and it doesnt have any obvious violent scenes. it revolves around a 12-year-old spy named ivan and how he comes to terms with a completely dangerous environment that killed every single one of his family members. ultimately, the movie reveals how the ussr coped with a war that took 20 million people, largely due to stalin being a bastard. the main ideological message here is that war is futile.

the american friend (w. germany, wender, 1977) - this film is an allegory for the relationship between hollywood and germany. a german guy with leukemia gets screwed into helping an american art forgery dealer as his hit man in order to help his family survive financially.

what have i done to deserve this? (spain, almodovar, 1984) - its about a dysfunctional family instead of a group of friends. the mother is a cleaning lady addicted to uppers, her husband is a cab driver who is forging hitler's memoirs with the help of this trashy aging german singer he is lusting after, a grandmother who sells her family food from the cupboard, a heroin dealer son, and a gay son. it basically goes through every single social taboo possible, which can spark a debate about censorship and whether shock value is played out. it is similar to trainspotting in some ways. other almodovar: pepi, luci, bom and other girls like mom (1980) - havent seen it, but its about madrid in the punk era, revolving around three female punks. im thinking 'go feminism' ...?

the celebration (denmark, vinterberg, 1998): this is about a bourgeois family who deals with their secrets and problems at the dinner table. a daughter is dating a black guy, sons not living up to expectations, a daughter who recently-committed suicide. its a good look at european society, and i think we can integrate some race theory and anthony giddens' project of the self here.

do you remember dolly bell (yugoslavia, kusturica, 1981) - this revolves around the conflict between an ailing, west-hating communist father and his wannabe rockstar son who gets mixed up with petty criminals and a prostitute named dolly bell. it's good for the seminar in that it really chronicles tito-era life through scenes of everyday life.

Comments

[Stephen]

So wait? You get to make up ANYTHING and that's the topic of choice?

Groan, count me out, maybe that's a seminar for smart people.

As for me, I've decided to try my hand at some Chinese history. I figure might as well know a little bit about the history of the next super power, as the USA is quickly giving away their super power status.

I've been told that as long as I learn to pronounce a few names correctly, Ill be good to go and won't have to worry about the homicidal tendencies of my scholastic colleagues.

[ainge]

theres more to chinese history than that... and asian history profs can be whackjobs just like any other. i mean, hello, theyre academics. ew.

and my seminar is not for smart people, it's for film fans.

[ainge]

and its anything within reason - ubc does have to approve it. they do this by ascertaining whether its a real subject and whether ubc already offers a course in the area.

[declan]

It all sounds a bit too highbrow (i.e. hard) for me (of your list, I've only seen The Celebration - it certainly was cheery).

I was thinking more along the lines of Delicatessen. Animal rights, dystopic visions, something like that...

[ainge]

you should totally see cesky sen - it is the best reality tv thingy ever. if you want, ill give you a copy when i get back to vancouver, cos im like an evangelist for this movie.

and the other movies are good too, i dont think theyre really that inaccessible. watching them as a seminar is more rewarding and helpful, id think, since we have eachother to bounce ideas whenever a WTF scene pops up.

[aija]

what about lars von trier?

[w. s. cross]

You could try comparing "The Conformist," which is real cinema with "The Dreamers," which is him trying to scam his own "Last Tango in Paris."

Frankly, the movies that he references in Dreamers are far better than the film. It's why quoting from your betters is dangerous, even for a director of his talents.