Popular Posts

Thursday, May 29, 2014

Divergent Reveiw: Reading Beatrice/Tris Through Lacan's Mirror Stage

Beatrice at mirror in Abnegation gif
Beatrice gets her hair trimmed the second day of every third month. At that time she may look in the mirror for a minute or so. That's FOUR times a year she gets to see her image in a mirror, from the chest up.
Beatrice at Mirror at Abnegation

Beatrice entering aptitude test room sneaking a look at herself
Tori: What's with Abnegation and mirrors.
Beatrice: We reject vanity.
Tori: Yes, I know. Sit down.

Here's a clip of that scene with commentary by director 
Neil Burger

So now you have seen that she lies in the chair and looks to her left that is a mirror, seeing herself. She gets up, walks over and sees herself standing for the first time - that is 
her entire physical body for the first time, not just from her chest up for a few seconds.
She gestures by raising her right hand as her image mirrors her in the mirror.

Reading through Lacan's Mirror Stage:
This EVENT takes place at six months usually. The mother plays with her baby in front of the mirror as the baby experiences an image that also waves its arms, jiggles its legs, moves in the excitement of its image, before words, before walking, before experiencing any SELF. 
Jacques Lacan
Beatrice - and Tobias and Caleb - have never experienced the Mirror Stage in the development of the SELF - the ego.

Beatrice has experienced herself as not selfless enough for Abnegation. She doesn't fit in. She doesn't belong.

How is it possible to feel or be selfless if you don't have a self.

Caleb fakes it by assuming a false self.
Tobias constructs a self at Dauntless.

A ZEN story:

A student goes to the zen master wanting to lose his ego.
ZEN master: First bring me an ego to lose.


"This jubilant assumption of his specular image by the child at the infans stage, still sunk in his motor incapacity and nursling dependence would seem to exhibit in an exemplary situation the symbolic matrix in which the I is precipitated in a primordial form, before it is objectified in the dialectic of identification with the other, and before language restores to it, in the universal, its function as subject." (Lacan ECRITS)

Lacan likens the EVENT to Kohler's Aha! of the ape grasping the stick to get the banana, the beginning moment of intelligence.
The moment as GESTALT!

Beatrice has just experienced herself completely in the mirror then looks to her left, where she is multiplied into infinity.
This is an EVENT!

For Beatrice it has never occurred until the Aptitude Test when she experiences the 
EVENT of the Mirror Stage,
which sheds its light on the formation of the I  the Imago that ancient term - as experienced in psychoanalysis. (p.118 Ecrits)

We have only to understand the MIRROR STAGE as an identification, in the full sense that analysis gives to the term: 

namely the transformation that takes place in the subject when s/he assumes an image   

Turning to the left she sees herself multiplied into infinity and turning around again multiplied.
And there are multitudes of images of Beatrice. 
To echo the Walt Whitman quote, "I am multitudes." 
That there is no one person you are. There are changes and they can be made.
Turning around behind her to respond to the command "Choose"
Choose (Now we have had 3 Beatrices)

Beatrice says, "Tell me." She doesn't understand. Choose what as she looks at the luscious raw steak and shiny knife on the pedestal surface.
"Choose before it's too late."
And then it is too late as the growling ferocious dog comes at her and she looks at the now empty pedestal tables. She has missed her chance by refusing to choose.

But how can one choose between options if there is no SELF to do the choosing?

Now she must respond to the simulation - aptitude test - with her instincts, responding to what occurs. Trusting herself to choose now since she is alone with the situation in the simulation. Only now does she experience a self that responds instinctively, rather than complying obediently to demands.

As the multiple ferocious dogs get ready to attack multitple Beatrices, Beatrice assumes the position of satyagraha - passivity in the face of violence. At this moment all the multiples disappear and there is just one Beatrice who now responds in multiple ways to the problems in the Simulation. At this moment Beatrice experiences a SELF who chooses, and who chooses instinctively. 
In a few moments Beatrice has embraced the entire Mirror Stage.
In other words we have TWO egos (at least), if you will. Or rather an unexplainable, pre-linguistic core of a bodily and mental and emotional self that has no words to define it. Just a GESTALT. Identity is irrelevant here. And on this "self" is built the social self, our many identifications, our tweaking of it to present ourselves to our world, our presented and performative self to others.

Exiting from the simulation Tori tells her she must trust herself. The test didn't work on her, she is divergent.

She leaves the building and on the way home sees some "factionless" outside rummaging through the dumpsters. A woman is there that she looks at. For the first time Beatrice sees the Other as a person, not a nameless outcast. And the factionless woman turns, knowing that she is not only being looked at, but that Beatrice SEES her, and she feels shame, quietly walking away from her gaze.

At home she will reflect Caleb's questioning of her result in the test by inverting his question,
"What were your results?"
And Caleb smiles.
Beatrice has felt her SELF and its will to know/power
She will continue questioning at the dinner table.

The infant repeats the Mirror Stage up until 18 months and then tires of it. The chimp tires of it almost immediately as the mirror is empty.
Beatrice repeats it during dinner at home as she turns her spoon over and regards her face in the curved reflection of her spoon. 

Lacan discusses the non-verbal, pre-verbal imago as the unalterable core of the self before all social identifications are piled on top of it, obscuring it to our knowing, enabling us to forget it.
And this is where Lacan brings in the concept, that again ancient concept, of
THE DOUBLE. THE SHADOW. The reflection in the mirror

Reading through Baudrillard-LINK Beatrice will encounter her DOUBLE as Tris, when in a life threatening situation, during her fearscape. She is not alienated, as we are, from her DOUBLE, but converses with it as primitive cultures do.
This isn't real.

Returning to Lacan, the SELF in The Mirror Stage begins to repeat and to imitate others, building up with social identifications a social or second self. Beatrice after entering Dauntless begins by observing how others are running down the stairs, climbing to the platform, getting on the train, jumping off onto the roof.
Copying the others.

And then comes the moment, the EVENT for Beatrice. 

Eric: Who's it gonna be?
Beatrice: Me.

And Beatrice climbs clumsily up on the ledge, gathers her courage, and she jumps first.
Upon landing in the net, Four lifting her out and suggesting a new name, she becomes 

She has condensed the Mirror Stage into 2 days.
She now begins the journey of building a social self in Dauntless where she will meet her Double a number of times.
First in warning in fearscapes, then in joy as she "flies" down the zipline and sees herself reflected in the windows of the buildings, 

lastly when expecting to be shot, in acquiescence, at her moment of impending death. The Double appears at the moment of Death. Her Double is silent as she looks at her reflection in a puddle of water as Narcissus did.

We have only to understand the MIRROR STAGE as an identificationin the full sense that psychoanalysis gives to the term: 

namely the transformation that takes place in the subject when s/he assumes an image   

Saturday, May 17, 2014

DIVERGENT REVIEW: Marcus Deconstructed by Vanessa Taylor's Screenplay in 4 Sentences

Vanessa Taylor - Screenplay for Divergent

Marcus Eaton
Our first look at Marcus is as the camera pans over in the beginning with Beatrice's voiceover with a slight lisp. He is sitting in the central governmental position next to Andrew.

He first speaks at the Choosing Ceremony:

After today you will no longer be dependents but full-fledged members of our society.

We see his tightened lips as Caleb chooses Erudite and Andrew's astonished and disbelieving face.

Marcus in Four's Fearscape with Tris
Marcus: Tobias! I'm trying to help you.To make you better. (In other words I'm beating you for your own good.)

We next see him when Tris does, after Tobias has been taken from her, and after Natalie has been shot and killed. She enters the place Natalie told her her father was. Inside is her father, Caleb, Marcus, et al.

Your mother?
Tris tells her father that her mother saved her and they hold each other and cry.

Marcus: (immediately while they are consoling each other) We need to leave here. Are there soldiers outside?

Tris: No, it's clear (looking at him with contempt and distaste).

Caleb: (comes up to her) I should have listened to you. I didn't know what was going on. Why are Dauntless fighting?

Tris: They don't know what they're doing. They're under simulation. I need to wake them up. I have to get into Dauntless.

Marcus: It's a fortress in there. Not gonna happen.

Tris: I can get us in.

Marcus at the Choosing Ceremony speaks in what linguistics calls "performative speech." He has a beautiful seductive voice. Persuasive. 

In the above sequence Marcus is attempting to dominate the group and especially Tris. She is a girl, approximately the same age as his son Tobias and he is not taking orders. He thinks. But this is the power of the screenplay. In four speaking lines Vanessa Taylor has given us the character of Marcus, his essence. His desire to control and dominate presented in language. There is no legislation that will protect you from this. It is a form of speech you will have to recognize and assert yourself in response. There will be consequences usually.

We need to leave here. This is a super ego communication. A parent to child communication. It's purpose is to dominate. 

It's a fortress in there. Not gonna happen. (Marcus immediately shoots down Tris's I need to get into Dauntless and wake them.

I can get us in. Tris asserts herself, takes command, leads the group and Marcus is forced to follow.

In the psychoanalytic transference we see all that we need to know of Tobias's childhood with this man. Any idea of his own, any assertion, any creativity, any solutions, etc ALL were shot down, DOMINATED by Marcus. And Tobias was beaten unmercifully for any disobedience, verbal or active. Passive endurance was his defense. 

You will see this in the supermarket every day if you wake up, listen and see. 


Inside Dauntless Tris sees Peter who knows where the Control Room of Simulations is. She has to shoot him to prove to him she is serious.
Marcus: Did you really have to shoot him? (menacing and contemptuous, disgusted)

Tris: Every minute we waste an Abnegation dies and a Dauntless becomes a murderer

Here he is trying to induce guilt in a former Abnegation member but Tris isn't buying it.Marcus is still trying to dominate and now with guilt.


Ready to Shoot Train Run
Marcus is too out of shape to run and grab onto the train, pull himself up. He shouts.

Marcus: Tobias! (asking for help;remaining in the city is death for him,)

Four/Tobias is conflicted. He wants to leave him there but also feels he should rescue him from death so he does. 

Vanessa Taylor's screenplay is ADULT. It is asking and demanding you to attend to what is said, what is meant by what is said. It is clear that Vanessa Taylor knows exactly what she is saying, what it means and what it does. It appears Taylor has read Foucault and/or knows his work. This is an intelligent screenplay not often seen (Dark Knight Rises an Exception also) in a movie intended for commercial consumption. Neil Burger has created a film that is art as well as commercial.

People know what they say.
They even frequently know why they say what they say.
But what they don't know is what they say does. - Michel Foucault

Thursday, May 15, 2014

Brother and Sister Incest.:Divergent and The Fault In Our Stars - WEIRD? STRANGE?

Shai Woodley and Ansel Elgort from Divergent and Fault In Our Stars

The genealogy of incest is interesting to think about. There was a time of universal copulation among the sexes in groups before any monogamy. The first men who wanted a woman for themselves only, had to buy them from the group, and this was frowned on. Mothers had children by sons, brothers, fathers, cousins, uncles, nephews, and knew nothing about kinship. Certainly those having healthy genes and inbred, survived and flourished, and those having genetic diseases who interbred were ill, died, tended not to have children and pass their defects on. 

An awareness of filiation evolved to inhibit certain men and women from copulation? Probably.

BUT the original prohibition of incest was between brother and sister. Sisters could be traded, sold, given as objects for the purpose of affiliation, with other groups.

Underlining the universal fact that marriage is not an alliance between a man and a woman, but an"alliance between two families," "a transaction between men concerning women," Georges Devereux drew the correct conclusion of a basic homosexual motivation of a group character. Through women, men establish their own connections; through the man-woman disjunction, which is always the outcome of filiation, alliance places in connection men from different filiations. .....Male homosexuality is therefore the representation of alliance that represses the ambiguous signs of intense bisexual filiation. .....and men are "never more homosexual than when they arrange marriages." (Deleuze and Guattari Anti-Oedipus :Capitalism and Schizophrenia p. 165)

This is difficult but stay with me:

 "Incest is only the retroactive effect of the repressing representation on the repressed representative; 
the representation disfigures or displaces this representative against which it is directed;
 it projects onto the representative, categories, rendered discernible, 
that it has itself established. 

In other words incest is now a category, a label, an observed object (Burroughs) that did not exist until it occurred to men to arrange their sisters's marriages with men they had homosexual impulses towards on a displaced filial bisexual phantasy. Now bolstered by the rationalization of alliance and alliance's perks.

The present modern "incest between brother and sister," has attracted a feeling of horror, weirdness, illegality, punishment, criminality, and whatever else one wants to attach to it. All it ever was, was projecting backwards onto a practice that allowed men to gratify their homosexual feelings with other men from different filiations.

Reading through Foucault the marriage alliances were cemented in time through the glueing together of property.When capitalism intersected, the marriage alliance was strengthened. And the original sexual impulses were buried in the folds of the established ritual. Women had to be pure, so the DNA of their child would inherit the property of their partner's  DNA (different filiation). So incest took on a greater taboo between brother and sister.

Speculating here on the early exchange of sisters, what if a brother did not want a sister to leave? What if he knew he were sexually attracted to his sister and did not want to share her with another man especially of a different filiation. What if the alliance and her monetary value were of no concern to him? Was that a bad thing? Maybe it was a better outcome for her too than to be "traded" to a strange man from another group?

Reading through Cleopatra, who was one of the most intelligent women of her time, speaking all the dialects of the inhabitants of Egypt up and down the Nile, overseeing the export of cotton, planning excellent strategy with Caesar to re-integrate Alexander's kingdom, having a child with him that by all reports was an exceptional adolescent before he was murdered by Augustus (too many Caesars).

Cleopatra was the daughter of a father and mother who were brother and sister. Her mother and father were brother and sister of parents who were also brother and sister, (and back for awhile) so proof of insanity, incompetence, inferior intelligence do not hold up unless those attributes are flagrant, and it certainly does not indicate a proof of any horror, criminality, weirdness, etc. I mean does anyone get the woolies because Cleopatra was the child of a sister and brother, who were themselves children of a sister and brother? Who even knew this before a minute ago?

All this is in our minds, carefully programmed to think of sex with one's brother as a terrible thing. Well in some cases it probably is. In many cases it would not be consensual. If it happens an abnormal guilt accompanies it. It is the abnormal guilt about it that causes the damage, not the act itself. What is the real danger? Worse even than genetic diseases being doubled and tripled? Other than pregnancy, which is not such a big deal now.
It is that there is no exchange and/or consolidation of property 

My reading BTW

It flaunts a fuck you in the face of capitalism. So at least if you "succumbed" you must torture yourself all your life about it. Hopefully you will ruin your life over it so as to receive the worse punishment possible on God's green earth that is turning not green.
All this is from Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus:Capitalism and Schizophrenia.

I can't stand it another minute. So many tweets on the fact that these two play brother and sister in Divergent and Lovers in The Fault In Our Stars and HOW STRANGE AND WEIRD that is. 
Ansel almost didn't get the role because of that. The producers were worried that the fans would be thinking

Obviously the ones who keep tweeting and tweeting about this can't tell the difference at some level between reality and a movie. Now if  you count the tweets - and they go on day after day - that is a scary thing among girls who are old enough to be online tweeting and writing tweets. What are they thinking, these primitive young women? They are now dragging "incest" a made up idea in the first place, into another level of simulation by imagining two actors in two different movies, being brother and sister and then lovers, and that being weird. 
This thinking is the beginning of madness.

Are you beginning to understand the Muslim world a little better?

And I must add something here about ants. I used to be fascinated with this topic. Some ants in the nest are kept - fed differently like bees? - as royal progeny. In the spring they will be released to fly, mate, and form new colonies. Some related ant colonies are so large they encompass another state or two.
But the point I am getting to is that some of these ants commit incest in the nest. These females are kept from flying on the "maiden" journey flyaway. They are forcibly held in the nest to become queens to make more ants. Ant factories I might say.

Friday, May 9, 2014

REVIEW DIVERGENT: A Leap Into the Unknown:

Beatrice and Her Family - Abnegation Dinner
This dinner scene is that of a simple, more or less religious family quietly eating their dinner. Sort of pre-bourgeois. Not unlike eating dinner with an Amish family here in the Ozarks. Conversation is limited, and the focus is on the meal and eating, then carrying the plates to be washed.There is the Foucauldian Grid in Abnegation, The Matrix, a Dominating Discourse, a standard of Normality within the Grid of Power/Knowledge.
Agnes Martin Painting

The control in Abnegation is by repression: Inscription of the Body; censoring of words and gestures, actions of selflessness, etc. It is irreversible, accumulative, metastasis 
Foucault doesn't want to talk about repression: but what else is that slow, brutal infection of the mind through sex, whose only equivalent in the past was infection through the soul (see Nietzsche - the infection through sex is nothing anyway but the historical and mental reversal of the infection through the soul under the sign of materialist parousia!) (Baudrillard - Forget Foucault p.44)

Dauntless - First Night in Cafeteria After Dinner 
Here is Tris happy at last. For the moment.
From the constraints of Abnegation and its confinement of body/mind she jumps into Dauntless, a facsimile of ancient Sparta, with its communal life of living at the edge. Living, not surviving as she was in Abnegation. A life of inversion.

Dauntless Manifesto:

  • We believe in ordinary acts of bravery, 
  • And in the courage that drives one person to stand up for another.
  • Dauntless never give up.

  • Only life pushed to the limit, to moments that escaped the system of equivalence, could render power powerless. 

    Giving one's life away - a counter-gift - was the only present that couldn't be reciprocated.

    Baudrillard in Forget Foucault p. 15

    Tris will be more Dauntless than the Dauntless. 

    She gives the gift, following the ideology to its final consequences: 

    Dauntless can only respond with the counter-gift and if not then it must commit suicide. The Symbolic Order must be obeyed.

    Dauntless has given Four the gift of life. He now has an unpayable debt. The counter-gift must be repayed (not right away but it must be repayed) and it must be greater than the gift. Four's counter-gift is the destruction of Dauntless. The Death of Dauntless. 
    Leading to the Death of the faction system.

    He will lose Four, his identity as Four, his self, his everything that made him so exceptionally Four.

    Ancient Chinese Wisdom: Be very careful about the life you save.

    Wednesday, May 7, 2014

    Review DIVERGENT: Deconstruction of the Script by Vanessa Taylor

    Vanessa Taylor

    Evan Daugherty
    Disclosure: I was sent a bootlegged copy of Snow White and the Huntsman of Daugherty's sold script and it is so awful I was embarrassed for him to have written it while I was reading it. Even with Hossein Amini's doctoring of it, it was still filled with cringe worthy lines kept from the original. So I attribute the beauty of the writing in the Divergent script to Vanessa Taylor. It is intelligent, brilliantly so. 

    As Foucault says, "When the writing is elegant it means that what is said is important."

    Universal and Rupert fired him. (A blessing.)Five writers worked on Snow White. Rupert saved that film, made it beautiful. So much for Daugherty.

    Aphoristic:Nietzsche's writing is almost completely aphoristic. It is musical and slips through your critical consciousness. The reader has no defenses. Nietzsche the great rhetorician of his time knew this full well. Ayn Rand, his disciple all her life followed his advice. Stephenie Meyer did, aware or not.

    Your writing must be even more so than what you are writing about. - Nietzsche

    Divergent is pared down, minimalist, no fluff. So is Dauntless.

    Beatrice feels everyone is afraid to volunteer to be First Jumper. So she says, "Me."
    And this is the pairing of brave/selflessness that Four will say to her later. She chooses here to be selfless which is also to be brave. And she chooses instead of holding back as she has done so far being last down the stairs, up the ladder, on the train, and jumping across the abyss. Now she will be first.

    All of this is conveyed in the images and the one word "ME."

    Here's Four as we first see and hear him: 

    Our first look here at Four reveals his open and rather surprised face. He has witnessed a 

    gift from the sky, from the Heavens miraculously appearing in the net. Like a Silkie from 

    the deep. Or Dante's Beatrice: a gift from the Heavens, a Blessing.

    Four: What,you were pushed?(quietly)

    Beatrice: No. (all breathlessly happy)Thank 

    you. (as he helps her down)

    Four: What's your name?

    Beatrice: B......stuttering

    Four: Is it a hard one? 

    Beatrice: nodding yes embarrassed

    Four: You can pick a new one. But make it good. You only get to  pick once.(emphasis on 

    choosing with no reversal)

    Beatrice: stuttering saying Tris. My name is Tris.

    Four: First jumper - Tris! Welcome to Dauntless.

    So quick. The contained surprise that the first 

    jumper is a girl, from Abnegation, who 

    appears elated rather than frightened by her 

    ordeal so far. Four is open faced, nice, 

    assertive and non-threatening, non-aggressive. 

    The ideal  presentation of the Butlerian 

    masculine social construction of gender is performed.

    Four has a beautiful face, intelligent and sensitive and sexy. But he is matter-of-fact all 

    business here, gently and firmly. No provocation, just a short intimate moment.

    People say that the first minutes of any encounter encompass the whole relationship in 

    miniature. - ALEX by Pierre Lemaitre (p. 339)

    There is quite a bit of subtext in this short and vivid scene:

    1. He underestimates her sort of by alluding to the fact he thinks she was pushed.

    2. He intuits her dissatisfaction with Beatrice and suggests it is possible for her to change 

    her name, become a different person, become Other. He offers her a way to change her 

    name with the limiting factor that it is a one shot choice with no return.

    4. His welcome is warm and accepting. This is unlike Eric's immediate dislike of her (his 

    frozen face) when she volunteers to be first.

    5. Through Lacan, Tris rhymes with Chris, short for Christina her first friend. 

    Here is Four's account of that first meeting with Beatrice/Tris in Allegiant:

    When her body first hit the net, all I registered was a gray blur. I pulled her across it 

    and her hand was small, but warm, and then she stood before me, short and thin and 

    plain and in all ways unremarkable--except that she had jumped first. The Stiff had 

    jumped first.

    Even I didn't jump first.

    Her eyes were so stern, so insistent.

    Beautiful. (Allegiant p. 491)

    Here is Tris's account just before she dies.

    I choke on a sob as the image of Tobias comes into my mind, of how dark and how still his eyes were, how strong and warm his hand was, when we first stood face to face. (Allegiant p. 475)


    Bataille in his The Eye: Her: Which part of me did you fall in love with first? Him: Your eyes of course.

    All this in 9 short sentences and the images. Now that is a screenplay folks. 

    Four introduces himself to the group as their instructor and says: My name is Four.

    Christina: Like the number four.
    Four: Exactly like the number four.
    Christina: Were one, two and three taken? 
    Four: What is your name?
    Christina: Christina.
    Four: (stepping closer to her face, half smiling)
    Four: Well Christina, the first lesson you will learn from me is to keep your mouth shut,  if you want to survive here. Do you understand?
    Christina: (nodding yes) 
    Four: Good. (stepping back from her)

    I will interject here to make a point Baudrillard makes on seduction and provocation. Christina is provocative not seductive. Tris is seductive.

    All this is said firmly, assertively, non-threatening in a way that projects that he means what he says. Four's truth - not his candor - is frightening to Christina, the others and establishes Four's character.The difference between truth and candor (ventilating) is revealed for those who want to make this connection.

    The Dauntless training here is immediately demonstrated as serious. We are not going to be your friends. It is not "training lite, decaffeinated training" as Zizek might say. 

    Four has been written to be performed as the new masculine. He has established a distance between his students and himself. This intensifies the transference and transgression. And the sexual eroticism.

    The trainers have no intention to be buddy buddy friendly with the initiates.And this is 

    appropriate in a military paradigm.

    In Roth's book his relationship with them is all muddied up. Vanessa Taylor has skimmed off the fluff to reveal the essence. And this is what is contributing to the Desire of the YA female/male viewers.The character Four's Excess is perceived as Desire, reading through Lacan and Zizek. The fantasy always present in Desire evaporates when listening to his interviews. Theo James is not Four. In the case of Twilight and Rob Pattinson it did not vanish but leaked across boundaries of screen and real life.

    Neil Burger's direction - in screenplay? - will have Four walk into almost every scene. His is a distinct, purposive, masculine walk that is immediately sexy and seductive rather than provocative.If he is in the scene already his face responds to the context of it.His Inscription of the Body is the new masculine: fit, sexy, sensitive, intelligent, and competent in what he has chosen to do. His flipping with the knives is masculine, the way he stands in the train when he lectures them. All on purpose.

    The faces: This is the influence of Passolini on Burger. The use of the face to convey emotion, thinking, hidden feelings, vulnerability, etc. Not the way Francis Lawrence used Rob Pattinson's face as porno in Water For Elephants. This is not to say Four's face is not sexy. It is, but there is more to the image than just beauty. And Burger's use of Tris's face is incredible. That young woman has so many different faces. Her face of repose in Abnegation is completely different from her face in repose in Dauntless. The close close-ups reveal her emotions when she doesn't look pretty or beautiful but very messed up. Shai performs Tris as a girl who grew up never having looked at her face in a mirror. Shai is fearless when looking in the lens of the camera.Rob Pattinson always knows how he looks when he looks in the lens as he was a model. Now he can't unknow it. And then there are those times he doesn't give a shit. 

    Primitive cultures felt that mirrors were destructive. One should know their face from the way they respond to people and the way people respond to them. 

    Theo James knows and early on in the film - it was shot in sequence - I felt uncomfortableness when the camera closed in on him. Especially when he runs at the head of the initiates and is called over and says, 

    "What've you got?" and we are shown the Factionless. It is quick and emphasizes his expressed masculinity - the way Four runs -  as well as showing us the Factionless in a group that appears somewhat menacing. Is it because they were once initiates who were dropped into Factionless status? The question hovers silently.

    I am not finished deconstructing this script but this will do for now.