Chapter 3 Questions

How does cinema reinforce the dominant ideology?

Cinema, by being a medium of the masses, is also governed by the masses. The dominant ideology of a society perpetuates itself through things like film. People, especially those who aren't film theorists, are attracted to films that they can relate to and tend to be pleased when their pre-existing ideologies are reinforced rather than challenged. As a result, the industry rewards feeding the dominant ideology rather than fighting it.

Why do so many stress the importance of developing counter-cinema? What are some examples of counter-cinema and how does it engage the viewers differently?

Because they realized the power and influence that cinema has, and how it was (and continues to be, to a degree) used as a way to reinforce pre-existing inequality. "Film theory during the 1970s and 1980s became increasingly concerned with the relationship between moving images and socially structured forms of inequity." (McDonald 101).

Avante-garde is a good example of counter-cinema, basically being counter-cinema by its definition of being different. Art house films, as I often hear them referred to, fall under this umbrella as well and have become very popular among film-lovers in the last couple of decades because they offer a contrast to the monotony of mainstream cinema.

Why do theorists draw attention to how specific groups are represented on film? How do viewers relate to these representations? How do some viewers challenge these images? 

Whether it is done properly or not, representation in film is a major aspect of how our the different groups within our culture have learned to view each other, especially in how they are similar to and/or different from each other. Thus, representation in film is extremely powerful and can shape both the perceptions of outsiders and people inside the group that is being represented. We as viewers relate to those who are similar to us in whatever aspects we can perceive, but we also tend to shy away when groups are depicted in a way that they are "the other". These kind of "othering" representations create prejudice towards these groups. This is why challenging pre-existing bad representation with good representation of minorities and disenfranchised groups is so important: it can create understanding and empathy where it might not otherwise exist.

Why did Laura Mulvey's essay have such an immense impact?

Mulvey essentially theorized and popularized the theory of the male gaze, which would go on to form a major backbone of the feminist film theory response to the overabundance of male gaze shots and films. She gave a name to a phenomenon that most women sure had felt for years but never had the proper terminology or framework to discuss it. "Mulvey's essay provided feminist film theory with a watershed moment." (McDonald 117).