Skate or Die in relation to narrative theories

Propp

·         Hero and villain blurred because good and evil is not defined clearly.

·         Hero could be argued as either skateboard or James

·         Natasha could be perceived as princess or villain.

·         Could be argued that absentation in this film is the hero going missing psychologically in that the skateboard becomes addicted to alcohol and drugs and commits suicide and James neglects his best friend and is blinded by romance.

·         None of these characters and narratemes are clear because the film does not distinguish clearly what is good and what is evil in the film.

·         There is a conflict between the two main characters but which is good and which is evil is not defined and can be debated.

Barthes

·         Skate or Die is open, the narrative can be perceived in several different ways depending on the way you look at it, each character can be perceived as either good or evil and each moment in the narrative can be perceived as a positive or negative response to previous actions.

·         The Proairetic code applies to my film as there numerous actions throughout the film that don’t particularly raise questions from the audience but build tension building up to the consequences of each action and ultimately resulting in the skateboard’s suicide.

·         The semantic code also applies to my film in certain scenes such as the denotation of the skateboard doing drugs has a much larger connotation of depression, anger etc at his owner. Also the denotation of James dropping the skateboard has connotations that he is leaving the skateboard for a woman and has lost interest in his skateboard due to his new found love.

·         The symbolic code is used in my film with James dropping the skateboard the explosion is then symbolic of the skateboard and james’ friendship crashing to the ground.

·         I believe however that my film goes against the cultural code as it is not such a canonical narrative as it doesn’t have clear well known narratives, there is no happy ending or clear good and bad characters or any perception of religion or science.

Todorov

·         Todorov identifies 5 distinct stages within narrative, the first 3 of which I believe apply to my film, where there is an equilibrium at the start (between the skateboard and it’s owner), there is then an action that disrupts the equilibrium (owner falls in love), and then the conflict is then recognised by the skateboard who goes onto become addicted to drugs and alcohol.

·         The 4^th and 5^th stages Todorov identifies where an attempt to restore the equilibrium is made and eventually succeeds can also be applied to my film, the skateboard’s owner yells at the skateboard to try and solve the conflict, finally the skateboard commits suicide and a new equilibrium is found when his girlfriend comforts him and they walk off into the distance, a relief is found and a new norm for the skateboard’s owner is provided.

·         An alternative 4^th stage that I have identified in my film is firstly the conflict continues on a downward spiral and becomes further and further from equilibrium

·         The alternative final stage of my film would be the characters reaching a point where equilibrium can never be restored again because of the consequences of a final action. (skateboards suicide).

Levi-Strauss

·         Levi-Strauss’s description of binary opposites in narrative form applies in certain aspects in my film, with the love between the skateboard’s owner and the girl, leading to the hatred between the skateboard and his owner.

·         This then leads to the skateboard going in to a state of complete panic and lack of mental stability, whilst the owner and his girlfriend are perfectly fine.

Campbell

·         Campbell’s 3 stages in narrative relate somewhat to my film, there is a definite separation at the start of my film with the skateboard losing his best friend, he is then faced with a test and his true character does emerge as he takes on drug and alcohol addiction, but he does not return for a triumph as he has lost his ‘heroic state’ and commits suicide as he has nothing/nobody left to live for.

Vogler

·         Vogler has a similar 3 ‘acts’ in his theory, in which the hero sets out with a goal to achieve and then returns home triumphantly. Again this can be applied to my film as the skateboard sets out alone to find himself but fails in doing so and ends in suicide.

·         If you see the owner as the hero then you could argue that he sets out to achieve love and succeeds in doing so, he loses his best friend on the way but he returns home with his new partner and a new life.

Eisenstein

·         Eisenstein’s montage can be applied to my film as the film itself actually has no dialogue so it could be argued that the whole film uses montage to describe it’s events through the shots used and the music over the top.

·         Certainly the scenes where the skateboard is travelling from one destination to another uses montages. The music and lighting set the mood in these scenes and this is all done through the shots used and the editing.