Books:

Title: (The name of the book, including its edition)
Author: (The author’s name: first their forename and then their surname.)
Year: (The year the book was published last)
Publisher: (The name of publisher that printed it)
Place: (Where the book was printed)

Title: Aggression and Violence
Author: Peter Marsh and Anne Campbell
Year: 1982
Publisher: Basil Blackwell
Place: Great Britain

Title: Television Culture
Author: John Fiske
Year: 1987
Publisher: Routledge
Place: Great Britain

Title: Film Noir Reader
Author: Alain Silver and James Ursini
Year: 1998
Publisher: Limelight Editions New York
Place: United States

Author: Valerie Bryson
Year: 1999
Title: Feminist Debates
Publisher: Macmillian Press
Place: Great Britain

Title: Narrative and Genre Key Concepts in Media Studies
Author: Nick Lacey
Year: 2000
Publisher: Palgrave
Place: China

Title: Dictionary of Media & Communications Studies Fifth Edition
Author: James Watson and Anne Hill
Year: 2000
Publisher: Arnold
Place: Great Britain

Title: Cinema Studies. The Key Concepts. Second Edition.
Author: Susan Hayward.
Year: 2001.
Printed: Routledge
Place: USA and Canada simultaneously.
Title: The Changing Roles of Women
Author: Ziauddin Sardar and Borin Van Loon
Year: 2002
Publisher: Heinemann Library
Place: Great Britain

Title: Media, Gender and Identity
Author: David Gaunlett
Year: 2002
Publisher: Routledge
Place: Great Britain

Title: Studying the Media
Author: Tim O’ Sullivan, Brian Dutton, and Philip Rayer
Year: 2003
Publisher: Oxford University Press.
Place: Italy

Title: Double Indemnity
Author: Billy Wilder
Year: 2000
Publisher: University of California Press
Place: Great Britain

Name: Advanced Studies in Media
Authors: Joe Nicholas and John Price
Publisher: Nelson

Name: The Media Studies Student’s Book (Third Edition) Authors: Gill Branston and Roy Stafford
Publisher: Routledge

What is film noir:

Name: Cinema Studies. The Key Concepts. Second Edition.
Author: Susan Hayward.
Printed: Routeledge
Place: USA and Canada at the same time.
Year: 2001.

"The film noir, predominately a B movie, is often referred to as a sub-genre of the crime thriller or gangstyer movie - although as a style it can be found in other genres (for example, melodramatic, westren). This is why critics see film noir as a movements rather than a genre. The critics point top the fact that, like all other film movements, film noir emerged from a period of political instability: 1941-58, the time of the Second World War and the Cold War. In the United states this was a time of repressed insecurity and paranoia: the American dream seemed in tatters and American national identity under severe strain."

Sin City Scene:

It opens with the camera fading to a rooftop scene while a diegetic cop siren sounds, the pitch being the first implicit audience note that crime is perhaps a presence in Sin City. The music then goes into a non-diegetic jazz sound, typically romantic in its gesture. We see a lone person.

A lithesome lady wrapped in a red dress. Even if only in a passive-syringe, unconscious manner, the audience identifies her as the typical noir femme fatale. Matriarchal power is before us.

Dangerous and seductive, she stands taut towards the railing. From a medium-long shot in the foreground we see her askance features, and in the background a stranger approaches. Confident in stride, tuxedo wearing; he’s the Bond representative of patriarchy. Binary opposition emerges.

A voiceover takes over. His voice. The ideology is reinforced. The audience begins to doubt the woman’s position of power. His voice in our head, we hear him speak. His monologue is smooth and poetic. He challenges male stereotypical stupidity. He is our hero.

They begin to talk. Verbally and implicitly, a battle has begun for supremacy. The camera angles switch betwixt both of them, over their shoulders in a viewpoint shot. The audience is impacted fully by their words. We warm to them, particularly the man. He is driving conversation and narrative forward. He is also a gentleman – he just offered her a cigarette. He is practically handing over his phallic power. Or a piece of it. The audience is affable towards him. She accepts, power then swinging to matriarchy.

Rain falls, diegetic sound coming soon after. The audience sees the storm surges.

Rightfully, the woman then takes the dialogue reigns. She reveals she is readying to face an adversary. The man says she wants to be rescued. The hero says he will help her. Passively, stereotypically, she accepts this. This stereotype attacks another; the one that says aggression is shown synoptically in red. The underestimating audience will be conflicted, thinking her now only a princess. Fans of film noir will figure this a femme fatale trap, typical to trick men. They kiss and embrace, each other ensnared, her svelte form melting in his strong frame.

Light flashes with a swift sound.

The man’s voiceover starts again. He anchors what happened, the explanation demanded from a tense audience. “The silencer makes a whisper of the gunshot. I’ll never know what she was running from. I’ll cash the cheque in the morning.”

The audience is disgusted. That man. That monster. That misleading, money-lusting, misogynist! He keeps her in his hold, almost remorseful. We are still in shock. Repulsed with us, the camera pulls away. We get our last look at that anti-hero.

Welcome to Sin City. None can be trusted.

New title:

“She shivers in the wind like the last leaf on a dying tree. I let her hear my footsteps. She only goes stiff for a moment.” For film-noir, women are always inferior to men. Has the genre extended far from this pre-feminist, societal view?

Changed Title:

“She is my warrior woman. Always, and never.” Matraichal and Pathriachal have always contested for supermacy in the various forms of film noir, with voice moreso given to men. Has the genre and its hybrids extended far from this pre-feminist, societal preference?

Theorists:

1) Laura Mulvey:
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/gaze/gaze09.html

The Male Gaze has it assumed that the male audience will grasp an appealing sight from women on the big screen. The gaze applies to Sin City unsurprisingly of its genre. We get an example of this when Nancy is poll-dancing.

2) Vladimir Proop:
http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:DOq964fLQTMJ:www.cfe.lu.se/CFEWP/CFEPaper29.pdf+propp+theory+of+whore+madonna+&hl=en

The idea that females take on one of four roles as either the Madonna, the Whore, the Wife, or the Femme Fatale. In Sin City, there are examples of all of these classes.

3) Sigmund Frued:
http://www.psybox.com/web_dictionary/Penisenvy.htm

Penis envy theory which seems unlikely, yet there it is. It states that daughters at a young age discover they lack male genitals, subsequently blame their mother for this, and turn to their father for love. In what way, I’m glad it isn’t stated. There is a possible hint of this in one scene in Sin City with one of the characters.

Comments Made:

1) Aanchal's Fizzing Whizbees: http://bonoonob.blogspot.com/2005/10/independent-study.html#comments

I commented on her blog in its beginning stages.

2) Abisheik Ghs: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17460473&postID=113148984925609892

I commented on his theories section which I like, and intend to use the second of.

3) Anita, Representation of teenage girls: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17647964&postID=112887417494606948

I commented on her blog in its beginning stages.

4) Bilan’s Blog: http://www.blogger.com/publish-comment.do?blogID=17760330&postID=113083727519318493&r=ok

I commented on her SHEP section.

5) Charan, cbjuicyfruity: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17760231&postID=113088680357948203

I commented on his genre section.

6) Danny, Little Britain: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17759765&postID=113058973311980151

I commented on his genre section.

7) Harbinder, representing black men: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17554214&postID=112863495379729353

I commented on one of his beginning posts.

8) Iena, Sexiness: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17579090&postID=113036966831615341

I commented on her theorists.

9) John, Banana Zone: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17454425&postID=112845530227195924

I commented on his bibliography.

10) Jugtar, Independent Study: http://www.blogger.com/publish-comment.do?blogID=17801049&postID=112920654998192567&r=ok

I commented on his media language section.

11) Kritina, Stripes: http://www.blogger.com/publish-comment.do?blogID=17841662&postID=112972560592040418&r=ok

I commented on her feminists theorist section.

12) Manjoth, Sex and the City: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17651854&postID=112888481178662429

I commented on her blog in its beginning stages.

13) Mariam, and her media: http://www.blogger.com/publish-comment.do?blogID=17482166&postID=112985601397013406&r=ok

I commented on her theory.

14) Shabazz, Simpsons Blog: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17615397&postID=112878008457962997

I commented on his blog in its beginning stages.

15) Russel: http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17714207&postID=112903734833410870

I commented on his blog in its beginning stages, but I still don’t know who you is! >_>

Self Evaluation:

Note: As wanted, this will be rated from one too five. I will assume one is horrible, two is shitty, three is average, four is outstanding, and five is perfect.

Attainment: I’ve bought and bourhed a few books and a magazine with an article regarding Sin City. Two out of five.

Effort: I sure as hell did not type that what I did and gather the information and buy several books that throw complex words that make me feel stupider than usual just to be modest here. I hauled ass to get things done, but that was often at the last second. I’ve still done a good amount. Three out of five.

Punctuality: Punctuality rating is low, because I would assume that the average attendance of others is 90-100% whilst my own is lacking in comparison. Two out of five.

Submission and quality of homework: I can’t remember not doing my homework, and doing it properly. I think I did it all well, but I didn’t go completely out of my way. Three out of five.

Ability to work independently: I’m as independent as an infant. Now, I believe it’s time for my spoon-feeding? One out of five.

Quality of writing: People with English as their third language are on par with me. My work is obviously lacking in media terms and phrases. Two out of five.

Organisation of media folder: Organisation? Media folder? The hell are those? One out of five.

Oral contributions in class: I’d much rather shut up and listen that speak and contribute. I’m sure that most people agree for the class sessions. One out of five.

Areas of improvement: I need to get that media folder in something close to order, and obviously be more independent. Working on punctuality wouldn’t kill me, either.

Course Evaluation:

Note: As wanted, this will be rated from one too five. I will assume one is horrible, two is shitty, three is average, four is outstanding, and five is perfect.

How well is the course organised?

Checking homework leads to discussion, that leads to verbally expressing ourselves, or analysing various media texts, and that leads to the teachers pinging in and sticking a few educated theories and theorists into our minds, along with a few key terms. I like. Four out of five.

How interesting is the content that is covered?

Most of the time, I find it interesting. That comment shouldn’t be unexpected. Why would I do a boring course? Four out of five.

How useful are the handouts?

Some are though provoking. But the others are like a mcguffin and homework rolled into one. Two out of five.

Have the lessons been well-paced?

I don’t feel lost and confused and hopeless, but I don’t feel that it’s all mindless garbage I’ve heard before. Learning, writing, thinking, learning, writing, thinking. It’s at a pace I like. Four out of five.

What is the standard of the teachers’ subject matter?

I’m not thinking how much of an uneducated dumb-ass either of them are. The exact opposite is true. They obviously know what they speak about with a depth of knowledge, but they aren’t condescending about it. Who knew it was possible? Four out of five.

How well has the course met your expectations?

What kind of weird question is this? I expected this same quality from last year’s own. Three out of five. >_>

Have the extra curricular events been useful?

Lets see. I get to have people see something I contributed to in public and give the same to others. I get trips to ask the makers of film and media stars what difficulties, joys and insecurities they have. And I get a reason to enjoy and intelligently analyse 18+ movies. All good here. Four out of five.

Has the Mcguffin Blog been useful?

It’s a trap! I’m not giving you an excuse to keep this evil homework-log running. Think of the children! Fellow students, vote low here so they don’t have a reason to keep this going. It’s too late for us, but we can save the future media students! One out of five.

Changes and improvements:

I can’t think of much here. For your Mcguffin Blog, stick a few key terms up for the sake of quick reference if it should slip our mind. Get more of those articles like Dirty Young Men and keep the outlet for sharing our views about it (the forum). We need more 18+ films to watch because . . . it would be useful for . . . look, we just need more of them. But if that’s not possible, try to get some films that we’re studying on something that’s easily accessible. For example, I really doubt we’re going to clearly remember “Love + Hate” if we don’t see it again. So far, so good.

Social Issues:

Women are, 98% by way of example shown in Sin City, prostitutes. Either this or they’re addicted to vinyl and leather. Whatever the case, the issue is present that ladies are being shown almost solely as sex symbols. This is a stupid and limited view to the informed and vast one we show nowadays. We know they can cook and irony because females are typically better at multitasking, too.

Let’s note that the tasteless and sexist joke was linked to this next point below: you feminists haven’t won your War on Sexism yet. You’ve simply accepted an ultimatum. In Sin City, this is shown in the extent of the women still being the eye candy Mulvey’s male gaze applies to, but at least there’s a scene where the ladies mow down men in an Uzis ambush from above occurs. Rejoice, fair feminists. It’s raining death, hallelujah! It’s raining death . . .

Historical Issues:

They don’t give an exact date, but Sin City isn’t set in modern days. We known it isn’t through the technology level the audience views. These can explain why Sin City is so full of sin to begin with, as it’s known that police weren’t all Holmes in hiding. Also, police stations would lack long-range communication, those branches communities away may have been in competition and unlikely to aid the other when they fail; it has the other one appear more proficient.

I’ll talk about how police used mug shots, and how these made stereotypes seen in Sin City.

I’ll have to look into how/if feminists changed the world into one equal for both sexes.

I’ll look at WW2 for the moral panics that came from that time, as well as how it affected women.

Economical Issues:

Two directors issue that popped up has to be looked into. However, when I was glancing around the movie having two directors actually isn’t as rare as I thought. There are a few examples I’ll try to find.

Next, the women and their job and power and whatnot should go here as well?

Political Issues:

I’ll have to look into how/if feminists changed the world into one equal for both sexes.

I’ll look at WW2 for the moral panics that came from that time, as well as how it affected women.

I’ll look at why everyone is up in arms about the film being so violent. As 20th Century consumers, surely we’re jaded enough to the violence and wanting enough to se it that it shouldn’t be an issue?