Film 4780: Puzzle FilmsComplex Narratives in Cinema (CRN: 17898) Georgia State University - Spring 2012 Class: MW 1:30-2:45pm

- Aderhold 312 Screening: W 10:30-12:20pm - Arts & Humanities 406 Instructor: Justin Horton Email: jhorton10@gsu.edu Course Blog: justinhorton.net (for syllabus) Office: 1020-A One Park Place Office Hours: Thurs. 1:30-3:30pm or by appt.

Course Description This course takes as its focus a recent cycle of films, variously labeled puzzle, forkingpath, database or mind-game movies, that fall under the umbrella term Complex Narrative Cinema. Complex narratives are characterized by their intricate structures, fractured and/or impossible chronology, and intentional attempts to confound or confuse the spectator. Thus, this class seeks to understand the degree to which these films may be said to deviate from classical storytelling, the spectatorial skills they call upon, the historical antecedents for such narrative constructions, and the cultural and technological contexts that might be influencing their recent (re-)emergence. The complex narrative film allows us an opportunity to consider a number of diverse yet interrelated topics, among them narratology, cognitive film theory, media industry studies, new media theory, continental philosophy, game theory, quantum physics, and chaos theory. At their best, then, complex narratives open onto rather profound questions of consciousness, agency, fate, memory, and time. Course Objectives By the end of the course, students will be able to: Analyze in-depth the narrative strategies at work in both classical and complex narrative texts. Grasp key terms and theoretical concepts from within cinema studies generally and narratology specifically. Read, comprehend, and critique scholarly writing in film studies and other disciplines within the humanities. Demonstrate digital literacy competencies by contributing to an online, collaborative group project. Conduct research in the field of cinema studies. Required Texts Readings posted either to ULearn or available on the web. Film Screenings Students are required to attend weekly film screenings in the Arts & Humanities Building, even though they may have already seen or have access to these films at home. Attendance will be taken both before and after the screenings and absences will be counted against ones attendance grade. Should one miss a screening entirely, it is her responsibility to view the film on her own time. Many of the films are available at the library, via delivery/streaming services such as Netflix or Amazon, or at retail video stores. Bear in mind that complex narratives often require more than one viewing in order to analyze them effectively; thus, allow for time to screen these films again on your own time, espcially if you are working with one of them for an assignment.

Grade Breakdown Grades for the semester will be determined according to the following scale: 1000-965 A+ 894-865 B+ 794-765 C+ 694-595 D 964-935 A 864-835 B 764-735 C 594 and below F 934-895 A834-795 B734-695 CGrades are weighted as follows: Participation 2 Reading Response Essays (500-750 words) Discussion Leader Narrative Analysis Essay (1000-1500 words) Midterm Analysis Essy (w/ Segmentation) Final Collaborative Project

50 points 100 points each 100 points 200 points 200 points 250 points 1000 points

Assignments 1. Participation: Each student is expected to arrive at class having read carefully the assigned articles and be prepared to ask and answer questions about this material. You will be graded on the quality (and not necessarily the quantity) of your contributions to our discussions. Total: 50 points. 2. Reading Response Essays: Students will complete two reading response essays (500-1000 words) over the course of the semester, one before the semester midpoint (February 24th) and one after. (Details below) Total: 100 points each. 3. Narrative Analysis Essays (1000-1500 words): Students will complete a narrative analysis of a classical narrative film of their choice. (Details below) Total: 200 points. 4. Midterm Analysis Essay with Segmentation (1000-1500 words): Students will first perform a narrative segmentation of one of a complex narrative (either one from class or one approved in advance by the instrctor). Then, they will write an analytical essay about the films construction. (Details below) Total: 200 points. 5. Discussion Leader: Each student will sign up for a week to lead our group discussions. Students will come prepared to ask and answer questions about the readings and put them in conversation with the films weve screened. (Details below) Total: 150 points. 6. Final Collaborative Project: In lieu of a final paper, students will be collaborating on a group wiki project on a film the select from a list of pre-approved choices. This wiki will be serve as a resource for others on the selected films and will be made available to the public. Total: 250 points.

Attendance Policy I will take attendance at the beginning of each class session. If a student arrives after the attendance sheet has been circulated, they may sign-in late but they will be charged with a half-absence. At screenings, attendance will be taken before and after the screening. Thus, if a student arrives late, they will be charged a half-absence. Similarly, if s/he leaves before the film ends, they also will be charged with a

half-absence. Students are allotted a total of three absences without penalty. These absences may be for any reason: illness, family emergency, car trouble, hangover, mental health day, etc. I do not need to be notified in advance of the absence. After the third absence, a students overall grade will be reduced by 5% for each missed day. Make-up Policy All work must be turned in via Google Docs by the start of class on the dates listed on the syllabus, regardless of if the student attends class that day. Work turned in after the deadline will be subject to a 5% penalty for each 24-hour period in which it is late. Exceptions will be made at the instructors discretion and only in the event of documented family or medical emergency. Google Docs All students must have a Google account for this class. A Google account is NOT the same thing as a Google G-Mail email account. You may use any email address you like to set up this free account. Students will turn all assignments except the final wiki project via Google Docs . You may compose these documents in Google Docs or use another word processor and upload or cut-and-paste them into Google Docs. All work must be shared with me at justinbhorton@gmail.com. Please use the naming convention of Last Name, First initial, Assignment Title. Example: DoeJ_Reading Response 1 Classroom Behavior The classroom is our shared space. Thus, each and every member of the classand this includes me will be treated with respect. This means not speaking when others are talking, refraining from sidebar conversations, not texting or browsing the web on your cell phones, or otherwise causing a disruption or disturbance for your fellow students. You may both eat and drink in class as long as you are doing so in a way that does not distract others. Sleeping in class is not permitted. A Note on Content Some of the films we will screen for this class may contain profanity, graphic sex and/or violence, or other content that some students may find objectionable. If you have concerns about such content, you may want to reconsider your enrollment in this class. Students Requiring Accommodations Students who wish to request accommodation for a disability may do so by registering with the Office of Disability Services. Students may only be accommodated upon issuance by the Office of Disability Services of a signed Accommodation Plan and are responsible for providing a copy of that plan to instructors of all classes in which accommodations are sought. Evaluations Your constructive assessment of this course plays an indispensable role in shaping education at Georgia State University. Upon completing the course, please take the time to fill out the online course evaluation. Withdrawal Students withdrawing on or before February 24th will receive a PW provided they are passing the course.

Students who withdraw after this date will not be eligible for a PW except in cases of hardship. If you withdraw after this date you will be assigned a WF, except in those cases in which (1) hardship status is determined by the office of the dean of students because of emergency, employment, or health reasons, and (2) you are passing the course. All undergraduates are allowed to withdraw with a grade of "PW" a maximum of six times in their entire careers at Georgia State. Students who exceed the limit will automatically receive a grade of "WF" which will count as an "F" for GPA calculations. Withdrawals taken before Fall 2006 will not count against the limit and neither will hardship withdrawals, withdrawals at other institutions, or withdrawals after the midpoint. Withdrawals after the semester midpoint are automatically given a grade of "WF." To avoid withdrawals, a student is encouraged to attend class regularly and complete every assignment on time. If you have concerns about your performance in this course, please do not hesitate to contact me. Incompletes An Incomplete will only be granted in the event of documented hardship. Please be aware that such circumstances are exceptionally rare. Course Calendar The below course calendar provides a general plan for the course; deviations may be necessary. NOTE: Readings marked with an asterisk (*) are either literary selections, articles from the popular press, or simply too short to be eligible for reading responses or discussion leading. 1. Introduction: The Labyrinth vs. The Maze 1/9 2. Classical Film Narrative 1/11 SCREENING: READING: Rear Window (Hitchcock, 1954, 112 min.) Bordwell, Classical Hollywood Cinema, (15pp) Chatman, Suspense and Surprise (4pp)* Bordwell, Principles of Narration (12pp) A Brief History of Puzzles

1/16

READING:

3. The Art Film 1/18 SCREENING: READING:

The Draughtsmans Contract (Greenaway, 1982, 103 min.) Metz, Story/Discourse: A Note on Two Kinds of Voyeurism (7pp) Bordwell, Art Cinema as a Mode of Film Practice (7pp) Sikov, Segmentation: Form & Meaning (4pp)* Stockton, The Lady or the Tiger? (7pp)* Beginning of Lost Highway (in class)

1/23

READING: SCREENING:

4. The Puzzle Film: Reconciling Syuzhet and Fabula 1/25 SCREENING: READING: Lost Highway (Lynch, 1997, 135 min.) Ebert, Review of Lost Highway (3pp)* Edelstein, Road Kill (2pp)* Buckland, Making Sense of Lost Highway (19pp)

1/30

READING:

5. Non-Linear Narrative 2/1 SCREENING: DUE: READING: 21 Grams (Inarritu, 2003, 124 min.) Narrative Analysis (w/ Segmentation) Debruge, Fractured Flickers (2pp)* Issacs, Non-linear Cinema (12pp)

2/6

6. The Twist 2/8 SCREENING READING Jacobs Ladder (Lyne, 1990, 116 min.) Henry, After Twenty Years* Kawin, The Minds Eye from Mindscreens (20pp) Wilson, Transparency and Twist in Narrative Fiction Film (15pp) Lavik, Narrative Structure in The Sixth Sense (9pp)

2/13

READING

7. Forking Paths: Storytelling and Contingency 2/15 SCREENING READING Sliding Doors (Howitt, 1998, 99 min.) Bordwell, Film Futures (16pp)

2/20

READING

Branigan, Nearly True (10pp) Cameron, Contingency, Order, and Modular Narratives (13pp)

8. The Database & The Logic of the Digital 2/22 SCREENING READING Existenz (Cronenberg, 1999, 97 min.) Kinder, Hot Spots, Avatars, and Narrative Fields Forever (13pp) Manovich, The Database from Language of New Media (25pp)

SEMESTER MIDPOINT -- FEBRUARY 24TH (LAST DAY TO WITHDRAW) 2/27-3/4 SPRING BREAKNO CLASS

9. Chronology, Technology, Memory

3/5 3/7 SCREENING READING READING

Introduction to the Final Project Memento (Nolan, 2000, 113 min.) Ghislotti, Narrative Comprehension Made Difficult (19pp) Benjamin, On Some Motifs in Baudelaire (43pp)

3/12

10. Alternate Worlds & Virtual Realities 3/14 SCREENING READING READING Run Lola Run (Twyler, 1998, 78 min.) Borges, The Garden of Forking Paths* Perlmutter, Multiple Strands and Possible Worlds (13pp) Deleuze, The Actual and the Virtual (4pp)* Deleuze & Guattari, Intro: Rhizome, from Mille Plateaux (22pp) Borges, The Library of Babel*

3/19

11. Cinema as Game 3/21 SCREENING READING READING The Spanish Prisoner (Mamet, 1997, 110 min.) NO CLASS: Screen Cache (Haneke, 2005, 117 min.) at home Simons, The Name of the Game, from Playing the Waves (20pp) Elsaesser, Performative Self-Contradictions (18pp)

3/26

12. Long-Form and Multi-platform Narrative: Television and Transmedia 3/28 SCREENING READING READING Lost -- selection of episodes Mittell, Narrative Complexity in Contemporary U.S. TV (11pp) Jenkins, Searching for the Origami Unicorn (37pp) Kim, et al, Storytelling in New Media (approx. 10pp)

4/2

13. Mind Games: Dreams, Hallucination, Doubling, and Fugue 4/4 SCREENING READING READING Mulholland Drive (Lynch, 2001, 147 min.) Elsaesser, Mind-Game Films (26pp) Andrews, An Oneric Fugue (15pp) Cook, Hollywood Narrative and the Play of Fantasy (12pp)

4/9

14. All of the Above? 4/11 SCREENING READING Donnie Darko (Kelly, 2001, 113 min.) Booth, Intermediality in Film & Video (16pp) Gaggi, Navingating Chaos Hill, Film and Postmodernism (12pp) Everett, Fractal Films and the Architecture of Complexity (13pp) Beginning of Synechdoche, New York (in class)

4/16

READING SCREENING

15. Abyme 4/18 SCREENING READING Synecdoche, New York (Kaufman, 2008, 124 min.) Stam, Preface from Reflexivity in Film & Literature (28pp) Selection from The Arabian Nights* Bordwell, Subjective Stories and Network Narratives (29pp)

4/23

READING

Reading Response Essays Some of the material for this coursereadings and filmscan be challenging. The reading responses provide an opportunity for you to reflect on these challenges. Students must complete two reading responses of 500-1000 words, one prior to the semester midpoint and one after. Responses must be submitted to me prior to our in-class discussions of the selected reading. You may chose to write about any one reading that you like. The goals of these assignments are two-fold: 1) your responses demonstrate to me the depth with which you are reading and the extent to which you are engaging with the issues of the course; and 2) it helps me to determine which concepts or arguments students are having trouble with so that I may then address these areas in class later. You are expected to: 1. Select one reading that you find particularly interesting, challenging, frustrating, or intriguing. Readings marked with an asterisk (*) are literary texts are not eligible for reading responses or discussion leading. 2. Articulate either a) the primary argument of the article in summary form; or b) aspects of the article that you do not fully grasp. 3. Relate your selected article to earlier readings, that weeks assigned film, or other films that you think this reading illuminates in some productive way. Similarly, you may write about how a particular reading or film complicates, reinforces, or enriches an earlier assigned reading or film (i.e., how a certain film doesnt fit, say, Bordwells discussion of forking paths, or how one reading might fill in the gaps of one we read earlier). 4. Admit if you are stumped by any reading or film; after all, this is a class on puzzle films: getting lost or stuck is to be expected. This is part of the fun. 5. Share the response with me (justinbhorton@gmail.com) via Google Docs before the start of the class in which we will discuss your selected essay. Discussion Leading

Each student will lead a class discussion of an assigned reading. Leading discussion is not the equivalent of giving a lecture: rather, you will help get the ball rolling by presenting the following: 1. A summary of the general argument of the article 2. The implications of the article (i.e., How does it contribute to or change our understanding of how puzzle films operate?) 3. Draw connections between your particular reading and the weekly screening 4. Bring in a film clip (DVD or web) of 2-3 minutes that you think illustrates or complicates the reading in some way. Note: the weekly screening is usually best here, though I am open to branching out. 5. Pose questions to the class that will help us unpack the article. It would be wise to write a reading response for the class session in which you will be leading discussion, as that assignment will help generate the summary and questions you may then use in class. GSU Policy on Academic Honesty REPRINTED FROM THE FACULTY HANDBOOK | July 2010 As members of the academic community, students are expected to recognize and uphold standards of intellectual and academic integrity. The university assumes as a basic and minimum standard of conduct in academic matters that students be honest and that they submit for credit only the products of their own efforts. Both the ideals of scholarship and the need for fairness require that all dishonest work be rejected as a basis for academic credit. They also require that students refrain from any and all forms of dishonorable or unethical conduct related to their academic work. The university's policy on academic honesty is published in the Faculty Affairs Handbook and the On Campus: The Undergraduate Co-Curricular Affairs Handbook and is available to all members of the university community. The policy represents a core value of the university and all members of the university community are responsible for abiding by its tenets. Lack of knowledge of this policy is not an acceptable defense to any charge of academic dishonesty. All members of the academic community -- students, faculty, and staff -- are expected to report violations of these standards of academic conduct to the appropriate authorities. The procedures for such reporting are on file in the offices of the deans of each college, the office of the dean of students, and the office of the provost. In an effort to foster an environment of academic integrity and to prevent academic dishonesty, students are expected to discuss with faculty the expectations regarding course assignments and standards of conduct. Students are encouraged to discuss freely with faculty, academic advisors, and other members of the university community any questions pertaining to the provisions of this policy. In addition, students are encouraged to avail themselves of programs in establishing personal standards and ethics offered through the university's Counseling Center. The examples and definitions given below are intended to clarify the standards by which academic honesty and academically honorable conduct are to be judged. The list is merely illustrative of the kinds of infractions that may occur, and it is not intended to be exhaustive. Moreover, the definitions and examples suggest conditions under which unacceptable behavior of the indicated types normally

occurs; however, there may be unusual cases that fall outside these conditions which also will be judged unacceptable by the academic community. A. Plagiarism: Plagiarism is presenting another person's work as one's own. Plagiarism includes any paraphrasing or summarizing of the works of another person without acknowledgment, including the submitting of another student's work as one's own. Plagiarism frequently involves a failure to acknowledge in the text, notes, or footnotes the quotation of the paragraphs, sentences, or even a few phrases written or spoken by someone else. The submission of research or completed papers or projects by someone else is plagiarism, as is the unacknowledged use of research sources gathered by someone else when that use is specifically forbidden by the faculty member. Failure to indicate the extent and nature of one's reliance on other sources is also a form of plagiarism. Any work, in whole or in part, taken from the Internet or other computer-based resource without properly referencing the source (for example, the URL) is considered plagiarism. A complete reference is required in order that all parties may locate and view the original source. Finally, there may be forms of plagiarism that are unique to an individual discipline or course, examples of which should be provided in advance by the faculty member. The student is responsible for understanding the legitimate use of sources, the appropriate ways of acknowledging academic, scholarly or creative indebtedness, and the consequences of violating this responsibility. B. Cheating on Examinations: Cheating on examinations involves giving or receiving unauthorized help before, during, or after an examination. Examples of unauthorized help include the use of notes, computer based resources, texts, or "crib sheets" during an examination (unless specifically approved by the faculty member), or sharing information with another student during an examination (unless specifically approved by the faculty member). Other examples include intentionally allowing another student to view one's own examination and collaboration before or after an examination if such collaboration is specifically forbidden by the faculty member. C. Unauthorized Collaboration: Submission for academic credit of a work product, or a part thereof, represented as its being one's own effort, which has been developed in substantial collaboration with another person or source, or computer-based resource, is a violation of academic honesty. It is also a violation of academic honesty knowingly to provide such assistance. Collaborative work specifically authorized by a faculty member is allowed. D. Falsification: It is a violation of academic honesty to misrepresent material or fabricate information in an academic exercise, assignment or proceeding (e.g., false or misleading citation of sources, the falsification of the results of experiments or of computer data, false or misleading information in an academic context in order to gain an unfair advantage). E. Multiple Submissions: It is a violation of academic honesty to submit substantial portions of the same work for credit more than once without the explicit consent of the faculty member(s) to whom the material is submitted for additional credit. In cases in which there is a natural development of research or knowledge in a sequence of courses, use of prior work may be desirable, even required; however the student is responsible for indicating in writing, as a part of such use, that the current work submitted for credit is cumulative in nature.