I am coming up with a new soundscript for the movie “Thank You for Smoking”. In this new soundscript, the voice-over narrator will be a young adolescent teenager. I believe the change of the voice and identity of the narrator will add more humor to the film and also strengthen the movie’s argument that public relations greatly affect society’s view of the tobacco industry. There will be bias of course, especially because of the demographic of the new narrator. However, this movie reveals things that are not common knowledge for most people, and so in a way the movie serves as a documentary of sorts. I believe the voice of a younger person surprises the ear initially; people simply aren’t used to hearing facts from children that often, so I think this new narrator will be a useful tool in changing the mood of the film.

The research question that helps introduce my claim is this: to what extent do the scenes in the video montage change the viewer’s previous bias towards the tobacco industry, or do they even affect them at all?

So compared to the previous narrator, which was the protagonist, I propose that this new narrator should be an adolescent teenager interested in the dealings of the tobacco industry. In this manner, we avoid any superfluous commentary from Naylor which suggests arrogance or bravado. Instead the curious teenager will be speak in a way that he is trying to uncover secrets of the tobacco industry. I feel that this will help make light of an issue such as politics or public relations to continue the comedic effect of the film.

As Kozloff analyzes the audio into categories such as keynote sounds, background sounds, and signal sounds, I will attempt to include these terms in explaining my new soundscript.

Finally, I just hope that I can actually enjoy my new soundscript as much as I enjoy the voice-over narration that is already in place. That may be a lofty goal, but it seems attainable.

Purpose of Sound Script

The new sound script I will write for minutes 3:00 – 6:30 of Moulin Rouge will be written such that it accents the strong emotions and signals produced by the non-auditory signals within the clip. I plan on investigating how emotions and depth and things are portrayed silently by filmmakers, and writing a narration which doesn’t crowd out these signals. The audience of my new sound-script will be the same as for the original script, though hopefully my script will prompt them to look at the movie more intellectually and such. I think the narrator of my sound-script will be a detached female voice, instead of that of the protagonist. Instead of carrying emotion and other implications, my sound-script will lay out only the barebones of what is physically taking place within the film, leaving depth to be inferred from the visual signals.

Research Question:

How does the movie Moulin Rouge portray emotion and dimension to its audience within the first scenes of the movie without the use of sound?

Main Claim and Why it’s Neat

In my major paper I will claim that emotions portrayed by images can carry extremely complex implications, and that visuals are powerful tools that need to be analyzed. In my paper, I’ll attempt to downplay the importance of voice over narration (somehow, I feel like I’ll end up arguing that voice over is a cop-out, but I’m not sure that’s what I want to do). My claim is risky because it does just that; my claim minimizes the significance of voice over narration, and might try to prove that voice over can eclipse what is being portrayed visually.

Stakes

My claim is important because it is broad and risky. The stakes are hight because I’m attempting to say something big: essentially that images are powerful to stand almost alone. My sound-script will embody that claim by removing from the voice over most it’s affect and implications.

How New Sound-Script will augment/critique/complicate the Moulin Rouge Clip

The visual signals within the clip from Moulin Rouge that I’m analyzing are extremely strong, and are used to convey feelings and depth (through the use of blue tinting, short spastic clips, etc.). I feel that these clips don’t really need a narration which adds a whole extra layer of dimension (thereby suppressing some of what the images are conveying). My sound-script, instead, will force the audience to focus more attention and emotion on the visual aspect of the film.

Artifact in Support of Sound-Script

I’m not entirely sure how it’ll work out, but I think it would be neat if I incorporated a bit from Illich’s “To Hell With Good Intentions.” It might be a bit of a stretch, but seeing as my new narrator will not be a character within the film, she will be speaking for the others in the film. Which is risky, and therefore is better off minimal – which is what I’m going to try and write my script to be?

Questions

It’s safe to say that I have a large number of apprehensions about attacking this paper (not the least of which being that a friend is coming from across the state to visit the weekend before it’s due). I’m not entirely sure what I’m getting myself into with this claim, touting the importance of visuals over a narration. It seems like I’m attacking a fairly big claim.

For my new soundscript, I want it to make the audience (my english 121 classmates) empathize with the main character, who is doing the voice over narration. As some of you know, A Clockwork Orange is features very disturbing themes. Thus, the whole movie revolves around one young man, with all his actions and words making him ever more disturbing. Hopefully, with this new sound-script, I will take away this disturbing element in the clip. The way I plan to achieve this is by changing the tone of his voice in the narration. In the original, the emotion in the words dont match at all with his actions. Hopefully, by making the emotion in his words match up more with the narration I can take away some of that disconcerting feeling you get from watching the original.

 My research question is “how does changing the tone (specifically, making it more emotional) change how people percieve the narrator?”

My main claim for my first major paper is that something as small as changing intonations can have a great effect on how someone views the clip. Its risky, because many people would say that something as small as that would have no real effect on the overall clip. But I say that the emotional cues are an integral part of the overall feel of the clip. the intonation could be all the difference between feeling one way as opposed to another toward this clip.

My claim is important because it shows just how important sound is. The fact that a change in something as small as intonation can give two completely separate feelings toward the narrator, shows that sound definitely plays a major role in interpreting a clip.  My sound script will serve to augment the clip, because it will be showing how open sound is to interpretation. How changing one little aspect of the clip can turn the overall feel of the clip upside down. I will definitly try to use Davis’ “Acoustic Cyberspace” in support on my new sound-script. Currently, I have no questions about anything. But I’m sure that will change soon.

1. New sound script (Purpose, audience, style):

            My new sound script for the Forrest Gump clip will maintain the majority of the original voice-over narration, but I will add profanity and change some of the phraseology to typical Vietnam War movie slang as seen in Full Metal Jacket, Platoon and Apocalypse Now. Changing it alters its target audience to male war movie fans.

 

2. Research question:

How does the voice-over narration in Forrest Gump, in conjunction with other classic Vietnam War movies, illuminate the development, over time, of the artistic portrayal of the Vietnam War? In other words, how does the American Vietnam War film genre from the late nineteen-eighties to present-day trace the history and conventions of Vietnam movies? In order to explore the question of genealogy, I will focus on three classic movies of the genre: Stanley Kubrick’s Full Metal Jacket and Apocalypse Now, and Platoon by Oliver Stone. I will compare and contrast these movies with Forrest Gump. To gain a better scope of all four films I must ask for each: What was the general political climate when the film was released? And more specifically, the climate surrounding the Vietnam War at the release date? What was the socio-political profile of the audience? What was the agenda of the film? What other Vietnam narratives already existed at the time of release? What were audiences expecting? Ready for? Tired of? What cinematic devices had already been exhausted? How was the film received? What success/ acclaim/critique did it receive? These questions, when seen against the overall evolution of the Vietnam genre, are of interest to filmmakers, audiences, anthropologists and comparative literature scholars. My work may stimulate conjecture as to whether Vietnam narratives will be produced in the future.

 

3. Claim:

I propose a new sound-script for Forrest Gump that follows classic Vietnam War movie conventions. Rewriting the voice-over narration to fit the Nam genre conventions will highlight the ways in which the filming does follow the Vietnam generic guidelines closely. I suggest that by changing the narration style and, thus fully transforming the clip to a classic Nam scene, it will illuminate the deliberate choice by the filmmakers to knowingly skirt a fine line, through the visuals, with the genre. A comparison of the original clip and the newly created quintessential Nam clip draw attention to where the filmmakers deliberately diverged from the genre. I argue that by following a new war narration trajectory the filmmakers are responding to their audience’s desire for a reinvention of the Vietnam War story.

  

4. Stakes, why is claim and new script important?

The claim is important because it gestures toward how and why film genre react and evolve in relation to the socio-political realities of the audience.

 

5. How does script augment/critique/complement film?

My proposed script complements the film by showing how hum-drum it would have been if the director had gone with a traditional war voice-over narration. It brings into sharp relief how effective the original narration is precisely because it does something different than all the preceding Nam movies.

 

6. Artifact:

Apocalypse Now, Full Metal Jacket, Platoon and Kozloff’s Introduction.

7. Doubts:

Is my question too big? Am I setting myself up for a novel, rather than a 5 page paper?

1. Briefly explains your new sound-script (e.g., its purpose, audience, and narrative style).

Well, my new sound-script has the purpose of making the opening scene of Simon Birch actually seem like a scary movie.  In other words, when I watched the movie with just visuals or just sounds, it does seem like a scary horror flick so I am going to make my new sound-script into a horror script.  The audience that I am trying to please would be my 121 classmates and of course Jentery, to bearer of good grades.  I want to use the narrative style of someone that is a little spooky.  Not so much cliched, sitting around a campfire at night telling ghost stories type voice but a legitimate, creepy person (possibly someone from the Ave. ?) 

2. States your research question

“How does the narrator’s casual, reminiscent tone conflict with the words that he is actually saying in the movie Simon Birch?” 

3. Expresses the main claim of your first major paper and why you believe the claim is reasonable and risky.

My main claim is that tone is one of the most important aspects of creating a compelling sound-script.  Tone embodies a person and can change the way that ideas and words are perceived.  I am hoping that in my new sound-script I will have a narrator with a tone that will go along with the creepy opening scenes and create a horror atmosphere that the viewer can get completely immersed in.  It’s sort of like that point that I believe Cruz was trying to make saying that sounds give you a full body experience while visuals do not.

4. Explains the stakes of your argument and why your claim and new sound-script are both important.

I don’t really understand what you mean by stakes.  Like what is at stake for making this arguement? But anyways, my new sound-script and claim are important because they expand on why sonic culture is important.  The sound-script is important because its new representation will show how a little change, like tone of voice of the narrartor, can completely change the tone and feeling of the film.

5. Articulates how – through sonic analysis – your new sound-script serves to augment, critique, or complicate your chosen multimedia composition.

By multimedia composition, do you mean movie?  My new sound-script will aument Simon Birch because it will show how the introductory scene can be perceived in many different ways.  And that the audience expects something by seeing the opening scene of the movie, like something family oriented and wholesome, but when you change the tone of voice you can get something completely new and differnt.

6. One artifact that I will be using.

I’m going to definetly have to throw in some of those Schafer terms like keynote and signal sounds.  And probably something a little spicy from the first reading, was his name Cruz?

7. Nervousness, frustrations or questions.

Well, I’m not thinking of any off the top of my head.  But I know that the questions will come during the conference.

The purpose of my sound script in this case is to alter the viewers perception of the clip using oposite techniques as the original director. The audience here is my english 121 class and teacher, a diverse and intelligent group of people. I want to explore how we are “pre-programmed” to believe in certain stereo-types. In this clip, it is easy to judge based off of the Latino culture. As a viewer I an guilty of such premonitions. I saw the images of a young girl in a poverty stricken environment, and when combined with the voice of herself in the future as a sophisticated english speaking woman applying to Princeton University I was completely thrown off. I immediately judged that this girl must have made a dramatic transition because typically you do not see poor mexican immigrants applying to an ivy leauge university. This has caused me to wonder, does this innitial perception of the girl cause the viewer to believe that her future is doomed or going no where? If it were not for this voice-over narration to show us how she has grown, would we assume her fate be different than her life turned out to be? How do we make these automatic assumpstions? This goes back to being “pre-programmed” by society to believe certain things. In addition, there are others out there that may have gone through similar events as the narrator and can sympathize with her. It is vital to consider the social context from which the audience is viewing the film. Leaving certain things up to our immagination (which the director does in this clip) causes different reatcions and responses to the clip.

I would like to ultimately claim that in this clip from the film Spanglish, voice-over narration is used to suppress the physical location of Mexico and rather to express the idea or way of life that Mexico embodies to its audience. I wonder why this technique of addressing the Dean of Admissions at Princeton University in an essay is used at the beginning of the film? How would things have been different if this was not included, becuase it verifies to the audience that she is a very intelligent and most likely successful girl because Princeton is an amazing university with high standards of education. With that, I would like to do a sound script in the voice of a young Latino girl (representing the narrator at a young age) to compare how the viewer would perceive her “Mexico” at this age in her life as compared to her matured and developed state of mind in the future. How does the director be sure that even when the narrators voice seems “americanized” that the narrator and audience are still emmersed in all things that are “Mexico”. I believe that if there were a young Latino girl narrating, we would have a completely different and dramatic interpretation of her life. I also thought about having the mother narrate the new sound script. I would like to do this because I feel like she is always portrayed as the less intelligent one, even though she is older and should supposedly be wiser. The fact that her daughter can adapt to America better than she makes the mother appear vulnerable and inadequate. Though, despite this, she still always seems to demonstrate impecable morals throughout the clip and film. She has honor, something that can relate to the idea of “Mexico” rather than the location of it. I think it would be interesting to see it from her perspective. And i’ll just be honest, it would also be easier to speak in a mothers voice rather than a young Lation girls.

There are obviously high stakes to my claim and new soundscript…minor changes can completely destroy or alter this clip dramatically. I think that my claim is both bold and risky because it deals with stereo-types and prejudice which is a very debatable issue. I’m saying that this “americanized” voice is supressing the physical location of Mexico, almost making it seem inadequate and making America out to be the land of opportunity and perfection. I think this is important for the viewer to realize, because instead of just watching it and assuming things they should wonder why they are assuming them. The new sound script will be less obvious. The original is very “black and white”. We have a girl emmersed in Mexico who does not even speak english combined with a very intelligent and well versed American sounding woman. How will the pride of their culture still be demonstrated with this new sound script. In the original, I almost feel as if the audience is obligated to understand just because the narrator is presenting it in such a way our culture can relate to. Without this supressive and dominating American voice, how will the clip be percieved? This we will have to find out…

I don’t know what text to use for this to back up my paper, which is something I would be grateful and completely open to suggestions about 🙂 thanks!

    The idea behind my new soundscript is to sap the manly, warrior voice of the narrator and replace it with a weaker, objective male voice. This will maintain the gender of the narrator, but the change in tone and word choice should drastically affect the audience’s mood. The narrator in my new soundscript will be a historian introducing the legend of Leonidas from an objective viewpoint. I will be providing the voice of the narrator, and I will try to keep my voice as steady and emotionless as possible. My clip starts with the fight between young Leonidas and the wolf, so I might start with something like “Spartan legend holds that King Leonidas defeated a giant wolf before returning to Sparta during his trials of manhood. Here we see young Leonidas engaged in combat with the wolf. Notice how he uses the terrain to gain advantage over a superior foe, much like he does later at the Battle of Thermopylae.” While the visuals remain the same, this soundscript will turn an epic war movie into a sort of documentary, weakening its emotional hold on the audience.

My research question that I developed in my Response 1.4 is “How does the narrators’ male warrior tone of voice and word choice affect the audience’s mood during the clip?”

My primary claim that I will seek to support in Major Paper 1 is that the narrator’s strong warrior tone is critical to the momentum and intensity of the movie clip by creating a relationship of awe and wonder with the audience. This claim is reasonable because 300 is an extremely manly war movie, so the presence of a male warrior narrator naturally enhances the mood. The claim also has risk attached to it because, as my new soundscript should illustrate, the narration carries the mood of the audience rather than the visuals. Showing that a change of tone from strong male to weak male drains the visuals of their effect would be dramatic indeed.

The significance behind my research question and claim is that my Major Paper 1 should offer insights into the effects a commanding male voice has on the listener, and even offer commentary on the male-dominated dynamics of action-movies, war, and society in general. Analyzing how a commanding male voice affects listeners will be useful for the final project in which we make an audio narrative presentation about service learning at the Boys and Girls’ Club.

The artifact I intend to use is Kozloff’s piece about voice-over narration. As Sohroosh mentioned in his blog entry, my new soundscript will do plenty of “telling” so using Kozloff’s piece will be very useful.

The only question I have now is how I can stretch one claim into a full length paper, or whether I should include multiple claims.

Ladies & gents of 121, it’s time to e-portfolio.

→ Let’s get started!←

(But hold ye britches until class on Thursday the 7th, k?  Much obliged.)

For my new sound-script of the opening voice-over scene of American Beauty, I plan to change the protagonist’s commentary to narration. The protagonist can be considered a commentator because he adds bits of analysis and reflection to the events depicted. He does not fully explain what the audience does not understand, as a narrator might. The narrator in my new sound-script will view the events from a different point in time. Instead of reflecting on the events of the scene from the afterlife, the protagonist will narrate from a position before the resolution of the film. One could argue that this change will simply tell and make the protagonist’s narration useless. His narration is in fact pivotal to the dissonance between ideal and material within the movie. Narration, as opposed to commentary, will place the audience directly into the tension of the events instead of placing the audience in the removed position of the afterlife which the protagonist speaks from. My proposed sound-script should alter and enhance the conflict between the layers of the soundtrack and visuals, because the protagonist’s commentary develops many of these points of dissonance to a limited extent. Also, changing the protagonist’s commentary to narration should engage my research question: How do layers of dissonance between the protagonist’s commentary, music, other sounds, and visuals develop the tension between the ideal and material in the clip from Sam Mendes’ American Beauty. This question is relevant because any piece of literature or film will have dissonance or harmony between societal ideals and the reality prevented in the work. The modes of production that the author uses to make these social statements might say something about the purpose, background, or assumptions of the author.

I am going to try to tie in Kozloff’s piece about criticisms of voice-over narration. Perhaps I could use a quote about “telling” through narration while addressing a counterargument.

My whole claim and sound-script idea seem to weak to me. That’s not really a question. Maybe, how could I make the claim and sound-script stronger?

The question I will like to look into is how the voice used for words gives them a meaning fbeyond their definition, evident when the voice is placed in a social sphere: the social context of the audience and social position of the voice as understood by the audience informs the implications voice has on the words being said. The implications are concerned with that possible effects of the words and the production of a broader meaning around them.

I think this enquiry is important for two reasons:

• Research into this social aspect of voice serves movie creators as a tool to maximizing their control over a message they hope to portray in their movie.
• Situating voice in this social sphere would provide a medium through which the viewer can exercise through experiments about the society they are in: an understanding of the manner in which interpretation of voice and its effecs is contingent on social factors may lead to questions about why a particular interpretation is made, what would have to change in society to create different interpretations, how would the story change if the viewer opened herself to different interpretations of voice? These questions arising from voice in movies can lead the engaged viewer to experiment through the movie. This play of ideas ignited by placing voice in a web of social connections may influence the viewer’s world-view thus possibly affect their action in that world.  

Reasonable, Risky: It was hard to find out why my argument may be riskly since I usually don’t articulate ideas that seem to make no sense to me. I think my argument is reasonable because hearing is just another sensory organ whose information must be made sense of by the brain, and I think that a lot of our understanding is informed through social relations.

It’s risky because it doesn’t accept that a composition of words holds a unalienable concrete truth but instead is alienable and malleable, and their voice, once understood in a social context, produces meaning; and this meaning lies in the recipient, thus it arises from a reaction. If one accepts that meaning lies in the recipient then it is easily understood that the meaning of words is in essence their effect. The idea of word’s meaning being alienable raises questions about ownership and authorship: how does the author claim ownership over words when their essence is not fixed? Are they taking ownership over a single meaning?

Viewing the audience as a producer of meaning goes against the view that voice-over narration spells things out for viewer.

For my first major paper I will probably use Alcoff’s Problem of Speaking for Others and Davis’ Acoustic Cyberspace. Just today I came upon the Comstock and Hocks reading and when I skimmed through it I thought they may have relevant ideas.

 My sound-script: I am not sure of the details but I know I am going to change the voice without changing the content of the original narration; possibly focusing on gender if I can’t find another social issue to relate it to.