American film since 2005: La La Land and Captain Fantastic
Explore some of the reasons why spectators may respond in very different ways to the same
character. Refer in detail to at least one character from each of your chosen films. [40 marks]
With any film, spectators may react in very different ways to the characters, narrative, and the
filmmaker’s intended meaning based on a variety of factors, such as their own personal experiences
as well as their beliefs and ideology. Both La La Land and Captain Fantastic encourage active
spectatorship, as Chazelle and Ross want the spectators to question their characters’ actions and
motives, and come to their own conclusion.
There are four kinds of reactions/readings that a spectator can have when watching a film: preferred
(where they agree with the themes/messages), negotiated (where they agree with some parts but
not others), oppositional (where they disagree), and aberrant (where they don’t understand the
themes/meanings at all). The characters in each film who I think the spectators are encouraged to
have the strongest reaction to are Mia, from La La Land, and Ben, from Captain Fantastic. In La La
Land, the narrative is balanced quite fairly between the two protagonists, Mia and Seb, but in the
scene where they argue over dinner, Chazelle forces the spectator to choose a side. Personally,
although I think that both of the characters did bad things, I sided with Mia, as I think Seb’s
comment about “maybe you liked me when I wasn’t successful because it made you feel better
about yourself” was a step too far, and destroyed any hope of them having a conversation about
their issues. Immediately after, the fire alarm goes off, signalling their relationship going up in
flames, and I wanted Mia to go on to be successful by herself. Similarly in Captain Fantastic, Ross
encourages the spectator to constantly question whether or not Ben is a suitable father or whether
the grandparents should get custody of them. I took a negotiated reading of Captain Fantastic,
because although I believe that Ben losing custody of the children would be detrimental to everyone
involved (other than maybe Jack), I do think the way he raised his children is unacceptable, because
although they are incredibly book smart, they have no social skills at all. We can see this in the scene
where Bo proposes to someone he just met, and we can also see the difference between them and
the other children their age when Ben proves his youngest child is smarter than the average
teenager. Both the characters of Mia and Ben force the spectator to make their own judgement on
their actions, which may lead to people having wildly differing opinions.
Another reason spectators may respond differently is because of the ideology presented in each
film; if they agree with the filmmaker’s intended message, then they are much more likely to have a
preferred or at least negotiated reading of the film. La La Land, for example, has the American
Dream as one of its main themes, which is a very Western and capitalistic message. All of the
characters in the “Another Day of Sun” sequence, for example, believe that if they move to LA and
work hard enough then they will achieve fame and stardom, however the reality is that they are all
stuck in traffic, not moving anywhere. Mia achieves the American Dream over the course of the film
– she goes from struggling actor to a very famous one through the hard work of putting on her play,
and she settles down as a celerity with a husband and a child. Spectators who feel like they relate to
Mia as a struggling actor/artist may take a preferred reading of the film because they want to
believe that they will also achieve the Dream, however more sceptical people night believe that the
whole premise of the American Dream is a fantasy. In Captain Fantastic, Ben’s beliefs are very
politically far-left and liberal, as he expresses anti-capitalist and anti-consumerist views throughout
the film, as well as supporting Trotsky and celebrating Noam Chomsky day. Leon Trotsky was a
Russian revolutionary who fought for and defended communism (the opposite of capitalism) in
Explore some of the reasons why spectators may respond in very different ways to the same
character. Refer in detail to at least one character from each of your chosen films. [40 marks]
With any film, spectators may react in very different ways to the characters, narrative, and the
filmmaker’s intended meaning based on a variety of factors, such as their own personal experiences
as well as their beliefs and ideology. Both La La Land and Captain Fantastic encourage active
spectatorship, as Chazelle and Ross want the spectators to question their characters’ actions and
motives, and come to their own conclusion.
There are four kinds of reactions/readings that a spectator can have when watching a film: preferred
(where they agree with the themes/messages), negotiated (where they agree with some parts but
not others), oppositional (where they disagree), and aberrant (where they don’t understand the
themes/meanings at all). The characters in each film who I think the spectators are encouraged to
have the strongest reaction to are Mia, from La La Land, and Ben, from Captain Fantastic. In La La
Land, the narrative is balanced quite fairly between the two protagonists, Mia and Seb, but in the
scene where they argue over dinner, Chazelle forces the spectator to choose a side. Personally,
although I think that both of the characters did bad things, I sided with Mia, as I think Seb’s
comment about “maybe you liked me when I wasn’t successful because it made you feel better
about yourself” was a step too far, and destroyed any hope of them having a conversation about
their issues. Immediately after, the fire alarm goes off, signalling their relationship going up in
flames, and I wanted Mia to go on to be successful by herself. Similarly in Captain Fantastic, Ross
encourages the spectator to constantly question whether or not Ben is a suitable father or whether
the grandparents should get custody of them. I took a negotiated reading of Captain Fantastic,
because although I believe that Ben losing custody of the children would be detrimental to everyone
involved (other than maybe Jack), I do think the way he raised his children is unacceptable, because
although they are incredibly book smart, they have no social skills at all. We can see this in the scene
where Bo proposes to someone he just met, and we can also see the difference between them and
the other children their age when Ben proves his youngest child is smarter than the average
teenager. Both the characters of Mia and Ben force the spectator to make their own judgement on
their actions, which may lead to people having wildly differing opinions.
Another reason spectators may respond differently is because of the ideology presented in each
film; if they agree with the filmmaker’s intended message, then they are much more likely to have a
preferred or at least negotiated reading of the film. La La Land, for example, has the American
Dream as one of its main themes, which is a very Western and capitalistic message. All of the
characters in the “Another Day of Sun” sequence, for example, believe that if they move to LA and
work hard enough then they will achieve fame and stardom, however the reality is that they are all
stuck in traffic, not moving anywhere. Mia achieves the American Dream over the course of the film
– she goes from struggling actor to a very famous one through the hard work of putting on her play,
and she settles down as a celerity with a husband and a child. Spectators who feel like they relate to
Mia as a struggling actor/artist may take a preferred reading of the film because they want to
believe that they will also achieve the Dream, however more sceptical people night believe that the
whole premise of the American Dream is a fantasy. In Captain Fantastic, Ben’s beliefs are very
politically far-left and liberal, as he expresses anti-capitalist and anti-consumerist views throughout
the film, as well as supporting Trotsky and celebrating Noam Chomsky day. Leon Trotsky was a
Russian revolutionary who fought for and defended communism (the opposite of capitalism) in
