POL 205C: Post-Cold War Conflict in Film
Intersession 2008
226 Cornell Hall
MTWRF - 9 am to 1 pm
Professor: Dr. Mike Gunter
Office: 212 Cornell Hall
Office Hours: By Appointment
Phone: ext. 2263
Email: mgunter@rollins.edu
Web address: http://web.rollins.edu/~mgunter/
COURSE
OBJECTIVES
This course examines
international conflict through the alternative lens of the feature film. Our objective is to better comprehend how the
post-Cold War environment fundamentally alters traditional global interactions
– and how to adjust accordingly. Case
studies highlight the role of
COURSE EXPECTATIONS
Active participation is an integral part of this course, especially given our condensed format over the intersession. Be sure to complete the two or three readings per class before we meet -- and come prepared to discuss them. You should also familiarize yourself with the films fellow students are presenting in class that day. Two resources to utilize here are The Internet Movie Database and Moviefone. The class participation rubric is attached to this syllabus as is the film presentation assessment mechanism, which comes in the two parts. One component of this grade is determined by the professor and the other by your fellow group members.
GRADING
POLICY:
Intersession courses at Rollins are offered on a pass/fail basis. To receive credit for this course you must complete both of the following components satisfactorily:
65% Daily Participation & Pop Quizzes
35% Group Film Presentation
- 15 % by co-presenters
- 20 % by professor
COURSE
SCHEDULE
The following readings are available either online or online through the Olin Reserve desk. If our Intersession course link is not yet active you may access the readings through my course on International Security (with the password “pol351”).
Monday, Jan. 7th
Lecture: The Future of
President Bush’s
Graduation Speech at
Cease-fire and establishment and mandate of UNSCOM (S/Res/687 of April 3, 1991):
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/596/23/IMG/NR059623.pdf?OpenElement
UN Resolution 678 (Nov. 29, 1990): http://www.worldpress.org/specials/iraq/unscr678.htm
UN Resolution 660 (Aug. 2, 1990): http://www.worldpress.org/specials/iraq/unscr660.htm
Three Kings (114 min) & Discussion
Tuesday, Jan. 8th
Lecture: In Our National Interest?
Maryann K. Cusimano, “Operation Restore Hope: The Bush Administration’s Decision to Intervene in Somalia,” Case #463, Institute for the Study of Diplomacy, School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University, 1995.
Sean J.A.
Edwards, Mars Unmasked: The Changing Face of Urban Operations.
Black Hawk Down (144) & Discussion
Lord of War Group Presentation:
Alex Richmond – Niko
Rules of Engagement Group Presentation: Ryan Kearney – Nick Wiggins – Shane McGowan
Wednesday, Jan. 9th
Lecture: The UN Blue Helmets & Humanitarian Intervention
UN Charter : www.un.org/aboutun/charter/
Alan J. Kuperman, “Rwanda in Retrospect: Could the Genocide Have Been Stopped?” Foreign Affairs, Jan./Feb. 2000
Condolezza Rice. “Promoting the National Interest,” Foreign Affairs, Jan./Feb. 2000, vol. 79:1, pp.45-62.
Hotel Rwanda (121) & Discussion
No Man’s Land Group Presentation: Jason Streit – Igor Milanovic
Blood Diamond Group Presentation: Kristin Hechler – Stephanie Schuldt – Matt Hurt
Thursday, Jan. 10th
Lecture: Addicted to Oil
Chapter 9 in Rutledge,
Ian. Addicted
to Oil:
Chapter 6 in Baer,
Robert. Sleeping with the Devil: How
Syriana (126) &
Discussion
Babel Group Presentation: Gian Louis Malvicin – Kenny Dabrowski
The Kingdom Group Presentation: Alex Nauman – Scott Fontaine – Barbie Sellmeyer
Thursday evening outing at Regal Winter Park Village 20,
Charlie Wilson’s War (97) at 1:25
or 9:25 or 10:10 pm
Friday, Jan. 11th
Lecture: Combating Terrorism
Ivo H. Daalder
and James M. Lindsay, “
Jessica Stern, “The Protean Enemy,” Foreign Affairs, July/August 2003.
Charlie Wilson’s War (97) or Lions for Lambs (88) Discussion
Sum of All Fears Group Presentation: Lauren Savage – Katie Ijams
Enemy of the State Group Presentation: Mike Cohen – Cory Fritch
Documentary Film
Resources of Note:
PBS Film – Frontline: The Invasion of Iraq (2003)
PBS Film – Frontline: The Gulf War (1996)
PBS Film – Frontline:
Ambush in
Mogadishu
Nightline Series Special
– Heart of Darkness
PBS Film – Frontline: Ghosts
of Rwanda
PBS Film – Frontline: House of Saud
PBS Film – Frontline: The Saudi Time
Bomb?
PBS Film – Frontline: Al Qaeda’s New Front
PBS Film – Nova: Bioterror
PBS Film – Frontline: Spying on the Home Front
Additional Film
Literature Resources:
Belton, John. American Cinema/American Culture.
Corrigan, Timothy. A Short Guide to Writing about Film.
Eberwein, Robert (ed.).
The War Film.
Franklin, Daniel P. Politics and Film: The Political Culture of
Film in the
Gregg, Robert W. International Relations on Film. Boulder:
Lynne Rienner, 1998.
Lipschutz, Ronnie D. Cold War Fantasies: Film, Fiction, and Foreign Policy. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2001.
Lyman, Rick. Watching Movies: The Biggest Names in Cinema
Talk About the Films that Matter Most.
Smith, William G. Plato and Popcorn: A Philosopher's Guide to
75 Thought-Provoking Movies.
PARTICIPATION
Strong daily participation is critical to the success of this course. This is the reason it is not possible to receive credit for this course without significant active participation throughout the week. Emphasizing participation in this course also demonstrates the extent to which classroom time should build on our readings. And it reflects my belief that you will learn from one another in this class, just as you will learn from me.
To receive satisfactory marks in participation one must come to class well prepared, completing all readings and assignments before our meeting time. You may find it helpful to make a rough outline of the day’s readings and/or jot down an intriguing question or two that arose from the readings.
Each day I will assign a possible 10 points for your participation, with at least 37.5 total for the week needed to pass the course (7.5 average). Be aware that quality counts more than quantity in this calculation. You do not need to dominate the conversation. In fact doing so will detract from your grade (don’t worry I will let you know before this happens). Students earn points in the following manner:
n 5 points for attending class
n 1 more point for being on time
n And 1-4 more points for quality of participation
o A level participation gets 3 or 4 points
o B level gets 2 points
o C level gets 1 point
Group Film Presentation
The Group Film Presentation requires students to critique an additional film beyond the five we see collectively as a class. This critique must be couched within the context of the material covered that day, i.e. No Man’s Land would center on the role and difficulties of UN Peacekeeping troops. Beyond the daily required readings for the class, additional potential resources of use for this assignment are listed at the end of your syllabus. In structuring your presentation consider the following questions:
- How effective is this film in communicating a political message?
- Is it historically accurate?
- Is it entertaining?
- What can we learn about international relations and conflict in today’s world through this film?
This assignment accounts for 35% of your evaluation in this course and comes in three parts:
- 7.5 % by co-presenter #1 - 7.5 % by co-presenter #2 - 20 % by professor
Students will work in groups of three, which are assigned on the first day of class amongst the eight available films. Two film presentations will occur each day thereafter.
Group Film Presentations need to be 15-minutes in length, with each member responsible for an equal share in that time. A separate question and answer session led by all members of the group will follow the last part of the 15-minute presentation. Remember that, as with conventional written assignments, you need to have a central thesis that guides your presentation, and then support this argument with substantial evidence. As always, ultimate evaluation will be based upon content, structure, and creativity. Please consult the attached rubric in planning further details of your presentation. And feel free to see me, of course, if you would like to sound out ideas the day before your presentation.
Group Film Presentation
Professor Evaluation
A
score of 15 per category denotes average performance.
Higher
marks must be earned by above average and exceptional work.
Name:
Film:
Presenter
area of emphasis:
Date:
Content
/20
1. Competence in factual background to the conflict
/20
2. Command of political relevance of film, including
conceptual orientation and cohesion
/20
3. Critical analysis of film
/20
4. Ability to work with others in your group and performance during Q&A
/20
5. Presentation effectiveness (intro & conclusion/delivery/supplementary materials)
Total Grade:
Group Film Presentation
Co-Presenter Evaluation #1
Name
of Person being evaluated:
Film:
Presenter
area of emphasis:
Your
Name:
Date:
On a Scale of 1-10 (with 6
being a passing mark) rate X on the following:
/10
1. Did X carry her/his share of the work load on this
presentation assignment? Please also
explain your answer here:
/10
2. Did X perform well in the actual presentation?
/10
3. How well did X do in the question and answer session after the presentation?
/10
4. Please rate your willingness to work with X again in the future on a group assignment.
Open-ended
Questions:
1. What percentage of the work did X complete for this assignment?
2. Did you learn anything by working with X on this project? If so, what?
3. How well did X work with others in your group? Were they on time to your agreed meeting outside class? Did they come prepared or free-load? Did they contribute useful ideas?
4. Any other clarifications to any of the above questions you would like to make?
Group Film Presentation
Co-Presenter Evaluation #2
Name
of Person being evaluated:
Film:
Presenter
area of emphasis:
Your
Name:
Date:
On a Scale of 1-10 (with 6
being a passing mark) rate X on the following:
/10
1. Did X carry her/his share of the work load on this
presentation assignment? Please also
explain your answer here:
/10
2. Did X perform well in the actual presentation?
/10
3. How well did X do in the question and answer session after the presentation?
/10
4. Please rate your willingness to work with X again in the future on a group assignment.
Open-ended
Questions:
1. What percentage of the work did X complete for this assignment?
2. Did you learn anything by working with X on this project? If so, what?
3. How well did X work with others in your group? Were they on time to your agreed meeting outside class? Did they come prepared or free-load? Did they contribute useful ideas?
4. Any other clarifications to any of the above questions you would like to make?