We’re more than halfway through, so you have a feeling for how well this story plays as contemporary realism, and to a lesser degree you have a sense of the text as interpretation of Othello. This is a required posting, wherein I’d like to have your thoughts about the film. You need choose only one of the bullet points below. You may do more if the spirit moves you. Remember to read other postings as well.
The Iago character “Hugo” is surprisingly placed as a pseudo narrator (as he gets the opening monologue about “flying”, “jealousy”, and “being a hawk”).
• Does his envy and his path to getting even ring true for you?
• Do the issues of jealousy and covert racism seem authentically portrayed?
• The film purports to convey the reality of your generation’s relationships, both romance and friendship. Do you recognize yourselves in the characters on screen? Where most and where least?
I initially found Hugo's character ridiculous, a character without motivation, shoe-horned into a preconceived plot. I began to understand him more when I realized that his father was the coach. A line like "I love this boy like my own son" would really hurt Hugo. There was also a moment -- when Odin yelled, "They don't know who they're messing with!" -- in which Hugo looked a little uncertain, like he'd only just realized what he'd released. That was his most human moment in the movie. The filmmaker certainly does a lot to emphasize Hugo's many reasons to hate Odin. In fact, the filmmaker drives all his points him with the subtlety of a sledgehammer. Much of the character's actions, despite the meticulous, heavy-handed rationales, still ring false; perhaps if the filmmaker had played it a little less obviously, they would have seemed more real! Shakespeare's plots in mumbled, colloquial English lose much of their magic. It's his wordplay and eloquence that, to me, define his plays.
ReplyDeleteThat said, making a modern interpretation of a Shakespeare play can illuminate different things; I like the ideas about racism in a private school, for example. And the scene of sexual violence certainly wouldn't be possible in the play. (An interesting piece, though much of it was gratuitous.) Odin's violence had a more immediate effect on me than the murderous machinations of his Shakespearean counterpart, since I've encountered people like him but not like Othello.
I don't see myself in these characters hardly at all. I don't identify with the romance between Odin and Dezzie -- there's no real reason for it to exist. I don't identify with the teenspeak, or the athletic hero-worshipping, or the petty stealing, or the prolonged games of pranking. They're the kind of things I watch on teen programs all the time, but not the kinds of things I live. Then again, I'm hardly your typical teenage girl!
I want to first further a point that allie said about how the piece loses its
ReplyDeletemagic" if it is not in Shakespeare's language...I want to say that I also think that the actual story line loses its magic in a modern day setting because it isn't necessarily believable. Shakespeare highlighted the extremes of the human experience and this was matched by the eloquence of his language...a kind of merging of form and content. So if you take away the "shakespearean element" of the piece, then it just seems a bit dramatic and over the top.
I want to respond to the second question posed. I think that Hugo's experience is a magnified portrayal of jealousy. He does what people WANT to do when theyre jealous, but not necessarily what they WOULD do...I think that there is a clear distinction. He is stealthy and fearless of the consequences of his brutal actions. But he is willing to do absolutely anything to get what he wants. He almost seemed inhuman because of his actions, but then I realized that in order to be so cruel he had to experience something to make him that way, because people aren't born evil. His jealousy of Odin makes him crazy and has driven him to act relentlessly brutal. I think that in some ways this is authentic because it shows human nature at a heightened state.
The racism in this play is more of an undertone and less of a key role in the story line. There are definitely points where it is brought out and confronted, but for the most part the characters don't really show their racism. I think that this definitely reflects real life/human nature. As we've talked about many times in different classes, racism is rarely out in the open anymore...people find ways to avoid showing their racism. So I think that this portrayal is accurate in this way.
I think that the director’s attempt to adhere so precisely to the plot of Othello made the film seem unnatural. The actions of the characters, particularly those of Hugo and Odin, appear to be grossly disproportionate to their motivations given the norms of modern society. Hugo decides to destroy Odin’s life because Odin unknowingly insults him by not choosing him to share the MVP award. Odin goes insane thinking about how his girlfriend of 4 months might be cheating on him. Their connection does not even appear to be much more than physical attraction. His reaction seems inordinate even if they had been faithful to one another for years.
ReplyDeleteThe reactions of the characters in Shakespeare’s Othello seem much more proportionate to their motivations simply because of the times. Iago’s status as a soldier is essentially his life, so one can understand his deep anger and jealously in this context, just as one can understand Shylock’s motivations for demanding Antonio’s pound of flesh. Furthermore, dueling over matters of honor was very much a part of the culture. It is far more believable that a nobleman raised to defend his honor at whatever cost would take violent action and that a husband would be distraught if he suspected his wife of adultery, given the roles of males and females in that society.
In summary, the director’s biggest mistake was that he failed to change the plot of “O” to accommodate the differences in culture and values between Shakespeare’s era and modern times.
Parts of this film seem ridiculous (as classmates above have stated), but it is art, not real life. In that sense, the film does a good job portraying the jealousy and hurt being felt by all the characters. In this regard, jealousy is portrayed well, but seems a bit unbelievable. I agree with Sarah that the director may have adhered too stringently to the text, but this IS a remake of a Shakespeare play so staying close to the story is crucial.
ReplyDeleteThe jealousy of Hugo seems to me the most unbelievable thing of the film. Hugo's actions are way too out of line for the amount of suffering he is inflicted with. His character seems evil for the sake of being evil (with poor motivation).
Jealousy on O's behalf also seems unrealistic, but his makes more sense. In the film, the character is struggling with fitting in and making sure everything in his world stays the same. He is being messed with and the madness like jealousy that ensues is believable.
Heres my stance on Hugo (as of now at least). Like others have said or hinted at before me Hugo's actions in "O" and even the entire movie itself seem terribly unnatural; the actions and the events seem forced, as if the actors need to loosen up a bit more. Specifically I'm referring to the dialogue. There are subtle differences with how the actors express their message and how real people today would express the same message, and, at least to me, this difference is utterly obtrusive and ubiquitous. It's hard to take the movie seriously when these things are so out in the open-hence the amount of laughing that occurred while we were watching it. Something just doesn't fit; it's as if a pentagonal block is trying to be put into a square hole-many things are right, but the subtle differences make success impossible. As for Hugo's envy and his jealousy, as Zia said, its probably the most unbelievable aspect of the entire film. If something similar happened today to again, real people, the person would probably feel crappy for awhile BUT they simply wouldn't have the drive to do what Hugo is trying to do, in the way that he's trying to do it. In the real world I think things wouldn't piece together as they have thus far in the movie. My point: Things just don't work that way in the real world. My second metaphor: its as if this play is "rough" grain sandpaper and our societal life is "smooth-ish" sandpaper. They create friction when they are rubbed against one another. For me this friction is interesting to observe, sometimes overbearing but interesting all the while.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Zia that the movie is not necessarily an accurate picture of high school life, but it does point out certain situations and emotions that are often relevant for people our age. The characters in the movie also are caricatures of specific emotions or psychological issues that are prevalant in high school life.
ReplyDeleteHugo, for example, exemplifies the kid who only wants to be the best at something. However, he manifests these emotions in destructive and manipulative plots to give himself a leg up over the other students. This emotion of wanting to be better than your peers is certainly relevant in high school, but not to the extent that it is represented in O.
From my perspective, its obvious that the script for O was written by an adult; an adult who does not understand that much about teenagers. On a theoretical level, it sounds interesting to depict Shakespearean plot within the context of a modern high school. However, I noticed that the script forced us, as the audience, to accept unrealistic assumptions. For example, after Mike beat up Rodger, we are forced to accept that this caused a rift between Mike and Oden; apparently Oden decided to stop talking to Mike. But why? Its not as if Oden was friends with Rodger. Its not as if Oden has any stake in the affair; it is simply a device to move the plot along. Furthermore, it is assumed that Oden and Mike would stay silent with each other even as Mike starts spending more time with Desi. People talk about everything these days; we are a culture obsessed with communication. Oden would confront Mike about these strange occurrences, and it seems inevitable that Hugo's name would come up. I imagine the conversation would go something like this:
ReplyDeleteOden: Hey man so what's happening with you and Desi?
Mike: Oh, I was trying to convince her to talk to you to talk to the coach about the fact Ive been benched for two games. You know, because you are not talking to me for some irrational reason...
Oden: Who gave you that stupid idea?
Mike: Hugo man.
Oden: Oh damn! Hugo also was the one who told me Desi's cheating on me with you. Lets go get some answers from Hugo...
And that would be it for Hugo.
I agree with Allie that "O" fails to make use of the subtlety and eloquence that makes the original tragedy of Othello so beautiful. Without this subtlety (and indeed, the film seems to drive its every point home with the force of a bullet train), the story falls a little flat. Moreover, the character relationships do not seem realistic to me at all - their experience of high school seems too petty, too competitive, and too driven by social status to be a real portrayal. Perhaps my opinion would be different if I were not at a school as wonderful as MA, but my experience makes me incapable of understanding the social motivations of Hugo. While I can understand his jealousy of Odin, I do not see how this drives him to treat Odin so cruelly. The friendships in the movie also seem unrealistic to me, as they are too indirect and far too many people rely solely on gossip for their existence. Why would Odin not simply ask Michael what is going on between him and Dezi, instead of relying on Hugo for gossip? This film is far too over the top for me.
ReplyDeleteThe theme of jealousy was decently portrayed up until the last 40 minutes or so (when they came up with the idea of murder). The first part gave pretty legitimate reasons for instilling anger and jealousy in anyone. However, the last 40 minutes or so took anger and jealousy to the extreme. I felt the movie had a ridiculous ending that was not believable whatsoever. Like we discussed in class, a minor would most likely not be able to bribe someone to sell them a gun in exchange for a watch. Also, the idea of murder does not seem reasonable nor realistic whatsoever. I did however think the movie was entertaining, so I guess it achieved some purpose.
ReplyDeleteThe film does not accurately portray or connect with our generation because the characters lack depth and the performances lack emotion or enthusiasm for the work. The film falls flat, failing to engage the audience or presenting any kind of relatability for them. The relationships seem fabricated, the villain was a terrible acting choice, and the motivations of characters, while important in the original text, feel trivial and unjustified in this version. Overall, the film fails on many levels, but in the end can still function as a mildly amusing comedy.
ReplyDeleteI can clearly see the effort to portray our generation in the film, and if the story were not so extreme, I would see how it is more applicable. At the core of it, the themes are very similar to what we teenagers may deal with - relationships, competitive sports, familial relationships (father-son/mother-daughter/whatever), jealousy. I relate to some extent in that I've seen these same struggles in my own life, but the way in which they are portrayed is totally overdone, as we have discussed in class already.
ReplyDeleteMy issue is the decision to involve death at the end of the film. Given the context, it seems COMPLETELY irrational and unbacked by any legitimate motivation. If the acting was better...MAYBE. But, I think in order for these murderous happenings to work, the film would need to stop being so indecisive as to what the focus is and NOT be in a hollywood high school setting. If this were more adult and perhaps business-motivated, I can see how the unexpected deaths might be worked in, but because we're in a relatively shallow, predominantly white, wealthy boarding school, it doesn't work. This is disappointing for me. There is a lot that could be done with this story line because of how beautifully it captures the extremes of human nature and emotions, but I would have liked to see a lot more character development and rationale behind the actions. Hugo killed his girlfriend...what the heck? It was so surprising and made no sense. It seemed like the director was just like: Okay, it's a movie! we don't have to justify it, it's not real! Let's do whatever the heck we want!
Not me really: Dylan's wouldn't post. Here he is:
ReplyDeleteI agree with Anna and Zia that while it may not be a accurate portrayal of high school life that the movie does get across the extreme emotions of Shakespeare. In O the feelings of betrayal, deceit and revenge are strong. While watching O I can guess that these are the elements that are in the Shakespeare play Othello. I enjoyed this movie a lot and am glad that we were able to see a modern interpretation of one of Shakespeare's works.
Best,
Dylan