Weekly Film Blog (#11)

Chariots of Fire. The film focuses on two characters, Liddell and Abrahams. This film emphasises on the themes of winning versus losing and search for meaning in life. Eric is a Scottish Christian that runs for the glory of God whereas Harold, an English Jew who runs to overcome the prejudice of being a Jewish man. The two have two different sets of motivations for their running as mentioned previously, but both are intrinsically and extrinsically motivated. For Eric Liddell and Harold Abrahams, intrinsically they both have the passion and desire to compete and to win running events. Abrahams especially, found that he wants to be the best in running and accept the help offered by Coach Sam to master the art of running and place at number 1 in the Olympics as a personal achievement and success. Extrinsically, Eric Liddell found that it would pleasure God to use the abilities gifted to him and to be able to be close to God when he runs. For Harold Abrahams, it is being able to prove his talent is worth being acknowledged by society despite his Jewish background. I think that his self-esteem is influenced by the respects (rewarding to Abrahams) he gets from others (Englishmen that spouts anti semitism) even if it meant neglecting his love to train and practice for the Olympics.


The peak of Abraham's pre-Olympic struggle is his loss to Liddell in a running challenge. Struggling with the fact that he has done everything that he could have done, feeling weakened and worthless. "I run to win. If I can't win, I don't run", this explains that his motivation is greatly influenced by winning (external motivation). However, he starts to realise that he could reach his true potential with the guidance of Coach Sam. In a way, he found a true meaning to running and that is to prove to himself rather than to prove to others. To further elaborate, we observe from Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

There is a difference between Abraham and Liddell in their hierarchy of needs. For Abrahams, his need is on the 4th level. That his self-esteem, his confidence, need for individuality is based on winning the gold medal. Abraham's running is driven by self-esteem needs, that is why it is difficult for him to go to self-actualisation because all he saw at the end goal was only the gold medals. Especially when he lost to Liddell and starts to ponder about the meaning of running. While Liddell, on the other hand, sees his running as a journey to reach the highest potential an reach a sense of fulfilment by reaching self-actualization when running for God. When he finally did win, he went back to China to continue his family's missionary life, which means that he has reached self-actualization by experiencing purpose and meaning in his inner potential.


From a personal observation, modern prejudice also displays subtle negative attitudes that are directed toward stigmatized groups such as gay men and lesbian women. Also, we can observe that because of the rising gender equality that negative attitudes towards women are being scrutinised. Women struggle to rise when people's preconceived notions of traditional gender roles are imposed on women and limits them to do things that are deemed not feminine enough in the menfolks's eyes. To compare with the film, men today are still being given the priority are deem more important in society. We observe this is true in the film industry where men are given leading roles and have a higher pay check than their women counterparts. A recent article came out on Forbes about the Hollywood Gender Pay Gap, how women are not only grossly underrepresented but are underpaid. Men are extrinsically rewarded by the fame and monetary reward that they receive. Some men do it for the sake of others that they think see them on a superior level. While women, do it for a more intrinsic motivation to surpass the prejudice and discrimination that was imposed on them, which is similar to Harold Abraham's situation. Influential Black women in the entertainment industry, especially, Kerry Washington, Viola Davis and Beyonce preach about finding meaning when standing up against the discrimination and believing in what you are doing is to prove to yourself that you and your dreams are worth it.


Reference:


http://www.forbes.com/sites/maddieberg/2015/11/12/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-hollywood-pay-gap/#2c6ad7251fe5

Weekly Film Blog (#10)

Schindler's List. "Jews shovelling snow has its significance", mentioned in the film by the commander of the Nazi. It's meant to signify the position of the Jews in their country. This film is a powerful and influential film directed by Steven Spielberg. It is a mission of the director to showcase the darkest timeline of the human history. Based on a true story, Schindler, the greedy German businessman who came to Poland to sought a business opportunity in the dying economy, came out as the saviour to more than a thousand Poland Jews. These survivors are then called as the Schindlerjuden (Schindler Jews).


Oskar Schindler's character was ambitious and financially driven. He came to Poland with a goal set in mind that is building a company from bankruptcy for his desire for wealth and success. He knew how to take advantage of the situation. He addressed Itzhak Stern as his accountant and the man who would take care of the company. He and Stern has qualities of a man with an honourable leadership. They displayed power not through coercive power, believing that others can be punished for noncompliance, but more of a legitimate power and expert power, the belief that a person has the formal right to make demands and based on a person's superior skill and knowledge (French and Raven, 1959). Schindler and Stern had legitimate power through their official business venture of enamelware. Countless times Stern approached the Nazis with an 'official' letter of many of the Jews saying that they were an expert in steel and machinery. The Nazis did not question Stern because of his legitimate and expert power in the matter of this business, much similar that they did not question the acts of discrimination of their leader. Schindler was able to acquire the Jews as hard labor because of this reason. In many occasions throughout the entire film, he was seen giving bribes to the Nazi soldiers and official members. You can say that from this Schindler also posses a significant amount of reward power. In the times of war, many resources are scarce, which meant that any money, jewels and food are perceived as highly valuable, and with Schindler's wealth and expensive possessions, he was able to reward these men into compliance. From here, we observe that there maybe a difference in the compliance of the soldiers and officials to Schindler than to the Reich or Hitler himself. The cruel obedience of these men towards their proud country and leader was not through materialistic rewards but more of an intrinsic reward. It is a relatively sustainable source of motivation for the Nazi's to continue serving their charismatic leader by exerting the dominating and cruel behaviour onto the Jews that were considered the disease to the country.

"It's not old fashion Jew talk, its policy now". People have come to accept that it is not only a norm but there is also a duty and responsibility to it. Referencing Zimbardo's prisoner experiment, as the guards became more and more into their role, they become more aggressive and abusive. Similar to the phenomenon of the cruel acts of Nazi's. The more they embody their role as the superior race, the more heartless they become. It started out from discrimination to segregation, to dividing and separating them completely from society and to exterminating them completely. It's ironic that decades later, after learning from History class and the whole world acknowledging this dark part of history that in today's age and generation that the same thing is still happening. The conflicts between Pakistan and Israel has caused so much death and destruction, children are being shot and killed, women are raped and men are either being bombed or are the bombs themselves! The most shocking part of this are the child suicide bombers that sacrifice themselves thinking that they are doing the right thing by serving their leader and their cause. Obedience in war and conflict is a very alarming.

An aspect of the film that is interesting to me was the shower scene,

Thomas Keneally in the original book writes this (Chapter 33)

Feet sticking in the mud, they were marched to the delousing plant and stripped by order of hefty young SS women with truncheons in their hands. Mila Pfefferberg was troubled by rumours of the type most prisoners of the Reich had by now heard - that some shower nozzles gave out a killing gas. These, she was delighted to find, merely produced icy water.

The fact that this comes from an original source that it is very reliving. Maybe that was the intentions of the director? That the Jews had a night time story telling the others that gas chambers exist, and when the time came that they were in a chamber, it was surprisingly water streaming out of the shower heads and not deadly poisonous gas made to exterminate the Jews. However, it would have been more realistic if the director actually gave us the experience of the Auschwitz death chamber and not painting it as a hopeful happier alternative. In conclusion, it has been a chilling experience and I appreciate Steven Spielberg's attempt at recreating this and honouring the memory of all the people that were affected by the war.



Reference

French, John R. P., Jr.; Raven, Bertram 

Cartwright, Dorwin (Ed), (1959). Studies in social power. , (pp. 150-167). Oxford, England: Univer. Michigan, ix, 225 pp.

Weekly Film Blog (#9)

Grace Is Gone. Grace was gone even before the military soldiers dropped by at Stanley's house to inform of her death. For Stanley, living in a life without Grace, alive or dead, was a place that is equivalent to not living at all. Stanley was seen to be in a daze or a state of nothingness, enclosed and shut off from reality. He struggles with his emotions and allowing healthy communication to take place. (Not wanting to share his experiences of Grace in the support group, not allowing his children to watch the news). This seems to become more prominent when the actual death itself was informed to him. He denies any entry for the military men and when he did, did not further acknowledge them or ask about the situation surrounding Grace's death.

Grief makes people do things. Why did Stanley decide to do things on a whim? Asking the girls where they wanted to go and decided that Enchanted Gardens was the perfect opportunity to be at instead of facing the fact that he has to tell them of their mother's death? Control Theory explains that we have a deep need to control our lives. It is the behaviours we do in attempt to gain control of our lives. News of death may have hit Stanley in the face, but he responded by wanting to take control of his situation, although at the same time we observe that he is also behaving out of denial. This would be explained by the buffer effect of social support, where people feel less stressed when others support their decision. Through this difficult times, Stanley relies on the daughters to support his decision making making him feel less guilty of the news delay. Want to go to Enchanted Gardens? Sure why not!

As grief and death is the central theme of this film, it demonstrates the different types coping styles displayed by each family member. Stanley's method of coping was denial (although he knows Grace is gone he continues to call her and leave voicemails to her), Heidi was surprisingly calm for her age which makes me wonder if she low key knows what was going on and represses the negative thoughts or just simply is a very calm and collected girl. Judging by her responsible actions of wanting to call the teachers to make sure they had their homework sent in, Heidi takes the role of the responsible role that Stanley clearly wasn't able to be. Dawn showed coping through her small gesture of remembering her mom at certain times of the day in order to have a certain sense of connection with the mother. Maybe its a placebo effect but it has worked on Dawn so far judging from her cheerful character throughout the film.

I also like to observe how Stanley goes to every stage of grief throughout the who film. From shock and numbness to yearning for comfort. To despair and disorganization to  reorganization and recovery. A way for Stanley to display his inner turmoil is by physical distress. He is seen coiling on the floor after the news was delivered and again in the grandmother's house, he was seen rolled in catatonic state of depression. Stanley was emotionally shutting down and not progressing through the stages of grief. Until, he remembered that he had daughters he needed to deliver the news to that suddenly he made it a way to turn the events around him to fill the void that Grace has left him. He become preoccupied with trying to be the fun and spontaneous dad. He choose to go Enchanted Gardens because it was the last place he and Grace had a horrible encounter and going there was his constant reminder that he was doing this for the daughters. In despair and disorganisation, Stanley is in despair that he doesn't know how to tell the girls, even telling voicemail Grace that they deserve to know. Lastly in reorganizaion and recovery, after the trip to Enchanted Gardens, he knows that he must tell the daughters eventually. I like how he chose to pull over and talk to them on the beach side rather than waiting to go home and deliver the news in the home because somehow, I feel like at the beach, it is like a neutral ground where even if there is sadness that comes from the news of the mothers death, it will not be associated with the home that they are happily living in right now.

In the end, the movie is excellent in portraying a man in grief.

Weekly Film Blog (#8)

Sybil. Oh Sybil. Being in a one-way amnesic relationship with her multiple personalities shows to be exhausting and confusing for this traumatised women. This defence mechanism that she built up for herself was due to her childhood trauma of being abused by her schizophrenic mother which explains her fear of hook-like objects and wash clothes.
A lot of the times, the movie shows the multiple personalities's own struggle. Marcia is hopeless and wants to kill herself and Sybil. Vanessa is conflicted with her feelings for Richard. Peggy the frightened kid that craves for the warmth of a mother figure. Vicky that wants to help out Sybil but is afraid of telling due to the others. However, these personalities only emerge when Sybil is in distress and conflicted with her repressed memories. 

Dr Wilbur is a psychiatrist that has an earlier interest on dissociative identity disorder (DID), how she strongly viewed Sybil's symptoms and diagnosed her with multiple personalities made me wonder if she could have had a different diagnosis if she wasn't so invested into rushing her biases. Even when she called her colleagues to discuss of the matter, she was already certain that it was multiple personalities. I believe that it would be more reliable and valid if Dr Wilbur were to consult another psychiatrist to further understand Sybil's symptoms and have a second opinion on her diagnosis. Other than that, even if it was multiple personalities, Dr Wilbur showed great interest and care into making sure that Sybil would understand her current state of conditions, although slight unethical. Dr Wilbur clearly is very invested in Sybil's condition. Often you can see that she is comfortable enough to bring Sybil into her own home. Is this normal for psychologists back then? Do they do sessions in an area where that is personal to the psychologist? Adding on to this, Dr Wilbur can be the confrontational type when the situation gets hot, verbally aggressive with Sybil and it makes me wonder if all the counselling skills we learned in second year was just for theory. Since I have no experience in these types of confrontations, I feel pressured to learn more when it comes to dealing with situations like when Sybil is in distress and panicking. 

I find that stereotypes is also enforced in the movie. The father of Sybil thinks negatively of the mental health institutions, even so much to denying that the existence of the mother's mental health problems. If the father wasn't so fearful of the stereotypes, Sybil's whole condition would have been avoided. Another person that went with the norm is the family doctor. He knew that Sybil had been going through physical torture but he kept quiet. Why? Because maybe he thought it was a small town and he didn't want people to talk and meddle in someone else's family affairs. 

Coming back to Sybil and her multiple personalities, it is very interesting to see how each personality emerge and share a part of Sybil through their own perspective. Whether or not these personalities are made up or if they are real, the actor that plays Sybil makes is very convincing. The idea of switching off one's own mind and being occupied by another in distressful times is a very interesting phenomenon. In my opinion, Peggy was the girl that she was during those times of childhood abuse and we see that she is often comforted by Dr Wilbur when Peggy is in distress. Vanessa is the more adult Sybil that she could have been if she hadn't gone through the ugly childhood nightmares. I believe that if Sybil wasn't so scared of everything she could have been Vanessa. Vicky is the scared teenager that seeks to please everyone, the other personalities, the guards at the gate, at one point even Dr Wilbur. While Marcia is the hopelessness within Sybil that just wants to end it all. However, I can only speculate this because at this point we observe that as Dr Wilbur further investigates on the personalities that it does tie to her past selves and memories. 

What really got my interest was the fact that Sybil confessed to faking her multiple personalities. At that point of the movie, I'm already baffled. This is because she has not yet met the other personalities, yet when being questioned by Dr Wilbur she was able to mimic Vanessa's accent. How does she know Vanessa has an accent?!?! So is she telling the truth? What is really happening here? 

I am still curious as to if dissociative identity disorder is an actual diagnosis for these symptoms. Because in some cultures, especially for Malays, if you have someone else in you that means you have the jin or whatever supernatural beings that you've upset... or inherited from family lineage. There are very few traditional families that would believe that it's not the works of Satan, because this culture has been passed down through generations of social learning and it is difficult to break that norm. Hopefully, now that there are other alternatives, people can consider that it's not the jin that's possessing them but their childhood trauma holding them back. 

Weekly Film Blog (#7)

Whale Rider. It was made clear in the beginning of the movie that Koro, the grandfather and leader of the tribe was displeased with the birth of a girl as the firstborn. Koro displayed no joy in the human life was brought into the world, but sadness and mourning (singing the Maori chants) to the still born twin boy. He continues to deny Paikea of her rightful position as the next chief because of her gender. In many parts of the world this format of leadership is preferred. Males have been dominating the command center right from the earliest of history. The long lines of pharaohs of Egypt were men (with the exceptional of a few women a thousand BCs later). The Malay Peninsula had a history of male dominated positions such as Laksamana, Temenggung and Bendahara. This exemplifies that the male was considered to be the superior gender and females were a lesser importance. From a psychological evolutionary perspective, the core assumption is that the human mind is the product of evolution through natural selection. Our ancestral leaders assumed the role food hunting and food sharing practices and men often take such positions (Vugt & Ronay, 2013). It is no surprise that Koro also seeks a male leader to represent the next tribe chief. It is a global phenomenon. It has been ingrained within the culture of Maoris through decades of social learning. It was passed down to the tribe just as Koro's lessons towards the firstborns of the tribes. The boys learned that certain traits are needed to become a strong leader just as Paikea was constantly reminded that it was not in her position to meddle in men's affair. This is how gender roles are learned, that is through these repeated social learning. Despite that, Paikea was not the typical tribe girl that follows orders. She has determinism, a strong drive to learn to achieve her goals. She knew how to take advantage of the situation around her, for example, to ask for Rawiri's help in the taiaha lessons when a angered Koro dismissed her off the marae grounds. She did not 'sit at the back' as ordered by Koro during the ceremony and this shows that is does not conform to the cultural norms. She is seen giving the Maori entrance chants (which are typically done by boys I'm assuming by how Koro's reaction when Nanny asked her to do it). She also led the first culture concert at the beginning of the movie, surrounded by all boys on the stage.

Koro's constant displeasure with Paikea seem to fuel her drive even more. This could be because Paikea was in her identity vs role confusion stage of Erikson's stage of development. She is trying hard to hold on to her roots despite being denied several times. In multiple occasion, she displayed talent, patience and understanding of her whole situation. It was probably because she felt a stable self-efficacy, believing in her competence enough to succeed. In a scene, she did not hesitate to jump into the depths of the ocean to retrieve the whales tooth which can only be explained that she knew she was confident enough to get the pendant (with an additional lobster!). On the other hand, Koro's self-efficacy was stable during the course of the lessons. He feels competent and believes he can find the next leader within the first born boys of the tribe, even seeing Hemi as a good potential, but declined as the last test of leadership was a failure. He turns depressed and calls for the ancient whales to guide him in his quest. From here, we can observe that the people of Maori believe in an outer force in shaping their destiny. In a way, we can say that they have an external locus of control. Especially when the beached whales turned up. Koro believed that they were a sign of a bad omen and maybe a sign of his failure. 

A theme that I relate on a personal level is the struggle of being recognised as a successful female in the eyes of a male. Being in a Malay culture, it is similar yet not completely parallel to Paikea's situation. We are expected to be the supporter and not leader of the family. To understand and act our roles out as the females that take care of the family. Even outside of the family, men expect a certain kind of attitude and behaviour from girls. I admire people, girls and boys, that can stand out and proceed not to live the stereotype despite the backlash they receive. Leadership is an admirable trait that left me in constant awe throughout the whole film, especially more from a culture that I am new to. I find it surprising to see that even thought they are very rooted into their culture such as they speak the native language, follow through rituals and traditions and are close knit within the community. However, they are still modern enough to be able to adapt to the community outside their culture. By this, I mean in comparison to the Orang Asli that are living secluded from modern world. There is one Orang Asli community smack in the middle of the metropolitan Kuala Lumpur yet they do not adapt well ie choosing to still cook using actual fires rather than technology. 

In conclusion, we should always try to give people a chance to prove themselves first before going with our preconceived notions regarding a matter. Sometimes it may surprise us and sometimes it will have us go through cognitive dissonance and deny any of it just like Koro did, but at least if we even consider to open up the possibility of something new, then it is a step towards a better and positive personal growth.

Reference:

Vugt, M. V., & Ronay, R. (2013). The evolutionary psychology of leadership: Theory, review, and roadmap. Organizational Psychology Review, 4(1), 74-95. 

Weekly Film Blog (#6)

Forget Paris. Remembering Paris was the exact reason why Mickey couldn't let go of Ellen. Mickey was a lonely man who had to bury his father in a country that he had never been before only to find out that the coffin was lost in between the transit. His encounter with Ellen was sarcastic and humorous at the same time, which attracted both to each other and led Mickey to work harder to impress Ellen with his wit and humor. Something that I personally feel that is a deceiving stage of any relationship. It is when they start to put extra effort in impressing the person of interest whether it be a friend or a potential lover, and that is the level of expectation that you put yourself into believing the in that person. Mickey made himself be the humorous, romantic and loving man that he was in Paris and that front was what attracted Ellen the most. However, coming back to America, the life that was expected by Ellen given by Mickey was not the same as she imagined and lived in Paris. This could also be explained by each other's mate value that is a determining factor of a mate choice (Shackelform, Schmitt & Buss, 2005). This initial infatuation and passionate love they experienced in Paris, where they continued to pursue and find each other attractive enough to be the other's potential mate that they decided to get married despite the lack of knowledge on each other's lifestyle and habits. 

Interestingly, married couples usually go through a honeymoon stage in the earlier part of their marriage but in Mickey's and Ellen's marriage, the start of their marriage was already the post-honeymoon stage. Ellen showed discontent with Mickey's choice of home and how Mickey had to constantly be on tour and away from Ellen. It was not the life that she imagined it to be. This dissatisfaction on her part started to bring up conflict within the relationship. Ellen brought up 'sacrifices' that she had made coming back to America and asking Mickey to do his part and make his sacrifices for her. In this, the process of social exchange was not balanced out between them. Ellen feels that the relationship is costing her more than it was rewarding her. Interdependence Theory suggest that we evaluate the outcomes of our relationships with two criterias: (1) what we expect from the relationship and (2) how well we can do with other partners. Initially, Ellen was married but separated with her husband and she saw Mickey as a romantic opportunity. It was mentioned that Ellen was deciding whether to go back to her husband but she did not know what to expect of her first marriage with the French dude. At that time, meeting Mickey and spending a great time all over Paris made her weigh her options of how she could have been better off with Mickey instead (comparison level for alternatives). Shortly after, Ellen married Mickey and her new outcomes (living in LA alone and depressed) were below her comparison levels (living romance in Paris), and that is why she is dissatisfied. The same thing happened to Mickey after negotiating with Mickey and making him sacrifice a year off the NBA season to work as a cars salesman, Ellen was happier, however, Mickey started to find dissatisfaction in his new routine. He was one of the best referee in the NBA and to be out of the season and working as something that was lacking fell short of his comparison levels.

The next stage of any marriage is the reproduction of an offspring. For a while, in the midst of their differences they had a common goal and that brought them closer than they ever were in their marriage. Unfortunately, their inability to conceive a child forced a emotional and physical wedge between them. It is especially more when Ellen decided that she wanted to work in Dallas in a new position in her job. Mickey shot down her idea instantly and that made her decide that she will go to Paris instead. How did this decision come about? In Interdependence Theory, there is another level of comparison which is comparison level for alternatives. It describes what we can achieve elsewhere and the lowest level of outcomes we will accept from our current partners. Whether we know it or not, we are constantly comparing our relationships with others and see if we are getting the best out of the relationship, whether the rewards and costs are worthwhile. In Ellen's perspective, if Mickey was not going to help her pursue her dreams in Dallas (the lowest level of expected outcome) then the alternative was to leave him and pursue her career in Paris on her own. This did not come easy for Ellen, seeing how much she was devastated when leaving Mickey but she had weighed her cost of leaving Mickey and having the offer of a life in Paris was far more rewarding (or so she thinks).

In the end, marriage may not be the best solution for some infatuated partners. It must be because the movie was filmed a decade ago, so the stereotype of having the need to marry the person you are in love in is heavily perpetuated. In the current world now, the idea of co habitation is acceptable and widely practiced by Americans. Couples communicate more because of the advancement of technology, something that was not a luxury back in 1995. Paris, being the capitol of romanticism and sophistication, adds to the fire of any relationship and that could be a risk because not all croissant fuelled romance can be long lived. 

Reference

Shackelford, T. K., Schmitt, D. P., & Buss, D. M. (2005). Universal dimensions of human mate preferences. Personality and Individual Differences, 39: 447-458. 

Weekly Film Blog (#5)

Strictly Ballroom. Scott Hastings has his own ideas on self-expression on ballroom floor, however, it did not comply to the preexisting 'ballroom steps' that is expected within the ballroom Federation. The dancing community has always had a set of rules and steps to guide them and to deviate from that path would basically mean to taint the history and glory of ballroom dance. Despite that, there was a scene in the film that demonstrates the dancing community chanting excitedly for the rumoured 'NEW STEPS', only to be shot down by Barry Fife the President of the Federation. From this example, we observe the role of Barry as an authority figure of an authoritarian leadership quality. Barry dictates when certain policies should be enforced, decides by himself who should be disqualified from the competition (as seen at the last scene when Scott and Fran were forced to stop dancing by Barry's announcement), and does not include the followers opinions (ie. Scott's father, Doug, was dismissed). 

The psychological aspect to explain the whole dynamic of this movie is the aspect of conformity and compliance. The dancing community does not question the idea of dancing to the same steps that were passed down from the previous generation. For Scott, especially, the group pressure comes directly and forcibly from his own mother and those that surround and support her (ie. his coach). The people were apprehensive of Scott's own moves that did not fit the traditional dance steps, probably more especially with Fran who is perceived as coming from a beginner level (and maybe from a Spanish background that does not conform to the white dominant culture of ballroom dancing?). It is explained when Shirley, the mother, had complied to Barry's request to dance with Les instead of Doug, her own husband because Doug was dancing to non traditional steps and Barry was there to ensure that he would not participate in that competition. In the same way, Barry had urged Scott to dance with Liz in order to honor his father that was left 'a broken man' when his father started to dance to his own style and lost the competition. I believe the persuasion technique of reframing was used by Barry Fife to manipulate the decision making of both Shirley and Scott. A frame is  a schema of beliefs and values and we use that to make meaning, but when new information is added, changing the frame, hence reframing. Barry knew how to make sure that people would comply to his requests. Shirley only wanted to win the competition so Barry made sure to deceive her that the only way to win the competition was for her to dance with Liz, making her rethink of her decision to dance with her husband. At the same time, Barry used Scott's fathers circumstances to his advantage, twisting the story to induce cognitive dissonance within Scott and ultimately alter his decision of dancing with Fran. 

In the end, with Doug's explanation on his part, Scott made his own choice despite the societal pressure exerted on him and his previous compliance to Barry. In line with choice theory (Glasser, 1998), Scott was driven by his need for freedom, power, love and belonging and fun. For freedom, is clear that he wants the freedom of dancing to his own style despite not being accepted socially. Scott is taking over control of his own life with his own decisions and direction by going against Barry. For power, by dancing with Fran, he is showing competence, to be recognised for his achievements and skills. For love and belonging, is the need to be part of a relationship, to feel part of a group. This is Scott wanting to be a part of Fran's life, wanting a relationship with her and close with her family. By dancing the pasadoble, he has learned to be a part of a group that accepts him for his passion and desires. Lastly, because Scott enjoys the pasadoble, to be with Fran and enjoy what they have together fuels Scott's the need for fun.

To conclude, films provide a platform to convey values and messages for people to reflect on. It is a good film that has make me think of all the times that I have been a victim of conformity and compliance. 

Glasser, W. (1998). Choice Theory: A New Psychology of Personal Freedom, New York: Harper Collins.

Weekly Film Blog (#4)

Gandhi. A large scale civil disobedience was sparked by Mahatma Gandhi and this historical event illustrates how social psychology is a very powerful tool in influencing people. The persuasion techniques that Gandhi carried out throughout his times of leadership was able to provide millions of Indians the strength to change their attitudes and belief. A central route of persuasion, being persuaded by the arguments and contents of the message, was one of the main reasons why the people followed Gandhi. In the film, Gandhi asked the people to join his non-violence movement to protest against the new law that requires all Indians to be finger printed as if they are criminals. His argument that it is degrading and an inconvenience made people support his movement. However, people do not follow mainly because of this persuasion, it is also contributed by the peripheral route of persuasion. The peripheral route involves the attractiveness of the speaker as a contributing factor. The people put their trust on Gandhi because of the persuader credibility. Unlike Gandhi who had been given the opportunity of an education and a vast experience in the higher society and with foreign power, most Indians that follow Gandhi were illiterate and of the lower class. They do not possess the same level of political awareness and complex philosophy of life as Gandhi did. However, they believed in Gandhi in giving them a voice for them to stand up for their rights. Gandhi had extensive knowledge and trustworthiness and the people can see that he has no ulterior motives and have the best intentions of the Indians in his movements. Especially when Gandhi left his elite lifestyle to live with the people with simple means (wearing the dhoti, fasting), that people look at Gandhi with more respect as this aligns with the Law of Liking that governs the law how we are influenced and and how we influence with those who are similar to us. 

A theme that comes to mind during this film is social responsibility. We are responsible to the community even if its just trough something as simple as an opinion or charity. Gandhi much like Nelson Mandela, understood the importance of social responsibility that everyone is together as a team. They both understood that war is a complicated and vicious process and through peaceful protests and strong will they could gain what they want through this non violent movements. This balance of wanting to create a change and fight for the civil rights while maintaining a peaceful agenda is important to prevent the blood spill of hundreds and thousands of lives. 

To conclude, famous leaders such as Malcolm X, Nelson Mandela, Louis Riel and Mahatma Gandhi are a very important examples of how different leadership would result in different outcomes. It is also important to know how it continues to influence the people today, such that the recent Beyonce 's Super Bowl half time performance was influenced by the Black Panthers and Malcolm X with her political all black formation. In the end, people will want to follow those who strongly relate to them and it is important that today's leaders should exhibit a leadership that will benefit the society and the world. 



Siti Nur Asyiqin 

Weekly Film Blog (#3)

Running on Empty. The Popes make running away from the FBI a fun and exciting thing to do, especially with the name changing and different hairstyles every few months, disguising under a different background and traveling to wherever remote town they could land to. However, this sort of lifestyle has taken a toll on each member of the family both emotionally and physically. The father, Arthur, turns out to be a good leader of the pack with parental instincts that has helped them to survive the years in fugitive. It is interesting to observe that although the father has given the freedom for their two children to roam around the neighbourhood and attend school, there are also other matters that he keeps tight in reins in order to minimise their exposure. For example, Danny learns to know that class photos should be avoided. This instinct, as Danny puts it, 'he has this feeling, he just knows' is not just mere instincts. Years worth of experience has programmed Arthur's recognition heuristics to provide him with the information that he needs to assess their family's safety concerns. (He knew to avoid that shady guy, Gus, with his plans to rob a bank with guns, he knew that going to private events would only increase vulnerability to exposure). 

From there, the theme that is the foundation of this film is trust and care for each other to survive. Because the children and wife knows that every decision made by Arthur is done out of concern for their life, they trust their fathers judgement. Arthur, knowing Danny is dating with a local town girl, did not show any objection, despite the possibility of Danny exposing too much information because he trusts Danny to be able to keep their secret safe. (The only time where his father was wrong because Danny did eventually talk to Lorna about it).  Trust persists till the end of the film between Anna and her father, where they discussed the possibility of giving Danny his second chance at life. The father, despite not seeing his child for more than a decade, trusts that Anna is trying to make amends for her mistakes as much as Anna trusts her father enough to know that her father would not report her immediately when she came out from hiding. Although, the interdependency between them is lessen with Danny's decision to go to Julliard, Anna's decision to reach out to her father for help, and Arthurs decision to allow Danny to be in charge of his own life decisions. 

The mother, Anna, is a strong character in the film. She's tired of that kind of living and she's made plans to turn herself in but somehow, with that much of emotional fatigue she is still loyal to her family, wanting to stay with Arthur, Danny and the little boy, keeping their family together and safe. Especially in the scandalous scene with Gus, it is a wonder how her constant cognitive dissonance had not have completely exhausted her! 

Danny, an adolescent mature enough to understand the father's dependency on their family, eventually figured out his life goals and pursued it despite the father's objections. His coming of age story (from adolescence to young adulthood, according to Erikson's theory) is inspiring as he struggles to balance between his desire for romance, family and education. He was juggling both issues of Identity vs Role Confusion and Intimacy vs Isolation. Being constantly changing names and identity and growing up to live in a life that is not his was difficult because there was no foundation for him to built on. (Yes, he knows his own name, yes he knows what he likes but putting who he really is in the back burner while living as an outcast on the outside is not a healthy environment for an adolescent that requires a stable sense of self. He also struggles to be the kind of man that Arthur hopes him to be (that is loyal to the family no matter what) when he has life goals he wants to achieve. This brings to the next issue where he wants to build an intimate relationship with Lorna and keep the caring relationship he has with his family but he can't have both, as choosing one side will result in isolation in the other. But that's the risk you've got to take living in on the run, right? 

Siti Nur Asyiqin

Weekly Film Blog (#2)

Awakenings. I appreciate that this film challenges the helping profession's perspective on the mentally handicapped. It seems like the doctors were not open to new possibilities and explanations as to the diagnosis of these patients seeing Dr Sayer's ideas as invaluable and unnecessary. Even coming from the patient itself, when Leonard requested that a pleasure such as a simple walk outside the premises of the hospital would be granted to them, was suspiciously evaluated and doubted across the various members of the board. The film shows the progression of how the caretakers and doctors began to work together to solve this natural phenomenon, serving an important lesson to all that every patient deserves to be treated as a human being despite the lack of mental attendance. 

I also applaud Robert DeNiro's performance in this film, allowing himself to immerse in the demanding character that is Leonard Lowe. A high point to this film (to me) was between the spastic moments of Leonard's 'protests' and the final dance with Paula. Awakenings can be set as an example of a film that provides its audience a reason to ponder on the meaning of life, to appreciate living even to its smallest detail and that the story eventually ends somewhere. Why do people actually like having to watch films like this? At times we choose to watch certain films due to a selective nature linked to our emotional experiences (Shiota & Kalat, 2012). Emotions were already set to motion without us (the audience) realising it; the feeling of fear and confusion (maybe a little bit of awe?) from Leonard's initial rebellious speech to the swelling of melancholy in the quiet and deliberate shift of the physical and mind that is the vicious by-product of the disease. Emotions evoked in films gives a person the pleasure of entertaining themselves with a multitude of emotions and and maybe help (for some people) to extend the awareness of their emotional spectrum. 

In Awakenings, what I admire most was the character development of Leonard. He was able to gather himself together as a person, decided on things that were crucial to him at that point of life, fall in love and understand his own impending exit. Although I have to say that after losing 30 years, it would be farfetched for someone to be able to have that quick of a recovery from the fact that they've lost that many of years off their lives (however, I suspect that the film over emphasises on the value of hope to build up the plot plays a role in this). Leonard's increasing level of physical and cognitive maturation allowed him to express himself throughout the film. It is when he first saw himself as the man he has become in the mirror for the first time, and it is that self-recognition that allowed him to feel what he was feeling and understand that he was no longer the boy that he was (Shiota & Kalat, 2012). It is something of a moment of realisation for us that he is free. As freedom is a recurrent goal and theme of the film, it is expected to anticipate these patients to finally break free from the catatonic spells, to take a firm grasp on their life back and to get their basic need for freedom (Glasser & Glasser, 1999). Alas, it was not the winning ending we had hoped for. 

We acknowledge that memories are the central development of self. Alzheimers is a fear that strikes deep within me, and although it can not be compared with this disease, I realise, as Leonard turned catatonic once more trapped within the unconscious of his mind in his adult diapers, that there is no longer the development of the self and I would be much more grateful to have Alzheimers in my genes rather than this tragic disease that claims Leonard and those others in the hospital. They keep on breathing, yet no memories (present, past or future) would ever allow them to show their emotions, thoughts or behaviours ever again. Death would be a finer end than this.




Siti Nur Asyiqin 


Referenced: 

Glasser, W. & Glasser, C. (1999). The language of choice theory. New York: HarperPerennial.Shiota, M. N. & Kalat, J. W. (2012). Emotion. United States Of America: Wadsworth.

Weekly Film Blog (#1)

Cinema Paradiso. I feel like it is an irony to be watching a classic film that delivers the story of an era of traditional stop motion films through a modern digital projection. Cinema Paradiso centers around the lives of those living in a remote village of Giancaldo where the very few source of entertainment for its’ town is the old Cinema Paradiso building with a projection booth manned by Alfredo, the projectionist.

A central theme of the film that keeps coming back to me is the perseverance of innocence. This can be seen in many scenes throughout, from the mother’s denial of the husbands’ death when mentioned by Toto, to Alfredo describing the lonely nature of being a projectionists and himself as a ‘nitwit’ who ‘never had any luck’ in hopes that Toto would reconsider his interest in the projection machines, and to Alfredo’s interference of Toto’s love life. It is not only the innocence of Toto but also the town of Giancaldo through the eyes of the local priest that cloaks any form of amore to preserve his virtuous little town.

Love, an emotion, a state of being, a thread that cements the people of the town. The towns people’s love for film brought the whole generation together, from children to the elderly. A priest to the town. A man to the towns’ square. A town to the cinema. A child to the films. Mother to child. Passionate youths to each other.

I believe that love is a powerful emotion and although Alfredo was not the father of Toto, it certainly seems like it was the kind of love that has been portrayed throughout the whole film. Gestalt explains that proximity and similarity are one of the accounts for the success of an interpersonal relationship by having them close by and having likenesses with others (Brownell, 2010). Maybe it was the small town and high occurrence between Alfredo and Toto, or maybe it was how much Alfredo sees himself in Toto, either way, it made their relationship and Toto grew up with a father figure (as it seems) to look up to. This loyal friendship, an unconditional love that Alfredo has proven from the moment he helped Toto with the missing money, allowed Toto to grow up into the man that he is. Despite the death of his father, the loss of Alfredo’s eyesight, the young love that shredded his naive heart and the simple life as a projectionist and all these helped the little child to dream, to hope and to look only at the bright side of things.

It is unlikely that many can agree with the notion that all these scenes were to portray the perseverance of the innocence of a child as we can see that despite his career success as a film maker, ultimately, he did not find the same feat in his intimate life. This is where the element of reality sets in in this film, that despite the effort that we put in (i.e. standing under someone's window for 99 days straight), does not put everything into the motion that we desire it to be.

A classic film such as this delivers a renewed perspective on how films were shot and conveyed back in the days. The film shots of this movie mainly focused on close ups; photos on the wall, video of Elena, the hands that thread the projection machines, the facial close shots of Toto. It shows progress, it shows nostalgia to the audience of the film, highlighting the important aspect of conveying the message of intimacy (an emotional distance between the actors and the audience). The soundtrack was also the major highlight of the production, providing the additional mood transitions to the scenes. Such as the unadulterated beauty of the final kissing montage threaded by the late Alfredo, that after leaving Giancaldo and holding on to the promise of “Do not give in to nostalgia, forget us all” made to him by Alfredo, finally, then was Toto able to give in into his 30 years of nostalgia (delivering to us, the audience, the same emotions as to the song and of Toto).


Siti Nur Asyiqin Samsudin.





References:

Brownell, P. (2010) Gestalt therapy: A guide to contemporary practice. New York, NY: Springer Publishing.