How useful has an ideological critical approach been in analysing the films you have studied? Refer in detail one or more sequences for each film.”
Plan:
Intro –
An ideological critical approach has been highly useful in analysing This is England due to the films explicit ideology about the destructive nature of hate and the harm that misguided patriotism/nationalism has on people. Such an approach to Trainspotting, however, is less useful, as the film has an implicit message on the arrogance of youth and the harmful side-effects of it. However, by displaying why people may find this lifestyle appealing and fun, the film negates a message on whether it is worth it or not.
1. How TIE conveys its meaning through the montages that preface and conclude the film, heavily implying and outright displaying the harm caused by patriotism and a brazen sense of entitlement due to ones own nationality, contrasting Combo’s ideology with the actions of Great Britain in the Falklands.
2. How a critical approach to Trainspotting is useful due to how the film conveys the arrogance and hedonistic lifestyles of its protagonists in the rapid opening montage of the film, conveying the vain but fun benefits of such a life, reflected in the style of the film, and mocking the middle-class values that Renton avoids.
3. How TIE conveys the harmful knock-on effects of such an ideology as Combo’s, indirectly resulting from the patriotism previously discussed, negatively effecting everyone, including the people who hold that outlook on life. This is conveyed in the assault on Milky and the harassing of children. The characters themselves also represent the social groups that were prevalent in England at this time.
4. How an ideological approach to Trainspotting is less useful due to the films objective display of the drawbacks, often horrifying, of Renton’s enthusiastic and hedonistic lifestyle, therefore not taking a stance on whether the lifestyle is worth the destruction it causes for them.
Conclusion: An ideological critical approach to TIE is much more useful than one to Trainspotting, as TIE has an unmistakable message that it wants the audience to accept and agree with, whereas Trainspotting has an implicit message about the folly of the carelessness of youth, but also objectively displays the flaws of such a lifestyle, ultimately not conveying a strong message like TIE does.
Essay:
An ideological critical approach has been very useful in analysing This is England (Shane Meadows, 2006) due to the films explicit message about how hate misguided patriotism can descend into hate, destruction and pain. Such an approach is not as useful in analysing Trainspotting (Danny Boyle, 1996), as the film holds a very implicit, veiled message about the arrogance and brashness of youth. However, the film negates the potency of this message by taking an objective stance, displaying the harms of such a self-destructive lifestyle but also the various appeals and attractions of that life.
This is England conveys the damage caused by patriotism through the opening and closing montages of archive news-reel footage from the 1980s. The closing montage, played immediately after the scene where Combo assaults Milky because of his ethnicity, shows the devastation caused by the Falklands War, which Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher pursued in a campaign to win support for her party and policies by stoking patriotism in the people by winning back land from Argentina. The montage exposes the victories of the war; a small village on a derelict island, and the subsequent casualties; scared, helpless POWs, dead British soldiers, parents not returning home, the effects of which are shown through Shaun’s character. In this way, Meadows is communicating that patriotism is flawed, and people can be urged into violence by a vague sense of entitlement because of their nationality, which is shown through Combo, who believes himself superior to immigrants, who he views as sub-human, because of his English heritage. This is also argued through the immediate juxtaposition between the montage displaying the horrors of the war and the violence caused by Combo’s hatred. Therefore, Meadows is arguing to the audience that the patriotic mission in the Falklands is an example of blind nationalism, which can lead to violence, reflected here through Combo’s character, who believes his violence and discrimination towards foreigners to be a just cause because of his unhealthy attachment to his country. The films ideology is highly explicit, as in the ending scene a reformed Shaun literally throws his St. George’s Cross into the sea, rejecting nationalism. In this way, the audience really has no choice but to accept the messages of the film as they are so blatant.
An ideological approach to Trainspotting is slightly useful because of its representation of youth. The young people in the film are arrogant, with punk attitudes, rejecting societal norms and social conventions. They reject “life” and the various capitalist characteristics of a picturesque middle-class lifestyle, such as “fixed mortgage payments” and “a job”. In the opening montage, Renton’s outlook on life is conveyed through the enthusiastic and upbeat ‘Lust for Life’ Iggy Pop track, reflecting what sort of music the group enjoy, and showing the various reckless activities that they engage in, such as shoplifting and drug usage. As Renton lists off the standards that he rejects in life, he is shown engaging in these activities through jump cuts and parallel editing, cutting at one point from him falling in a football pitch to him falling in a drug den while experiencing visual ecstasy from a cigarette. The rapid editing of the scene, connecting shots through Renton’s enthusiastic non-diegetic omniscient narration and the fast non-diegetic compiled score, reflects the quick fixes and vain thrills that he thrives off. The film is conveying the message that youth can be careless, arrogant, and many young people may feel as if they are untouchable, here shown through the chaotic but thrilling life that Renton lives, and the disregard he shows to societal rules and expectations while chancing death with the use of heroin. He even says “there are no reasons. Who needs reasons when you’ve got heroin?”, defining his careless and hedonistic approach to life.
An ideological critical approach to This is England is also useful due to the films unmistakable message about the negative impacts of hatred. Throughout the film, Combo is built up as a vitriolic man who genuinely hates people unlike him, as from the first scene he appears in, crashing the skinhead’s party, the film pays particular focus on his spiteful and dramatic pronunciation of racial epithets and his disregard for Milky, a man of Jamaican descent, while he performs a racist caricature of a black man. The audience is manipulated to hate Combo, e.g., non-diegetic, composed somber piano music plays as he insults black people, and, by extension, the hatred and racism that he represents. For example, in the scene where he gives a speech to win people over to his cause, he reflects many of the sentiments that people would have heard in 1980s Britain, such as criticisms of her war in the Falklands and the rise of unemployment. He also turns his hatred towards Muslim and Middle-Eastern minorities, reflecting the rise in nationalist sentiment and political parties in the 1980s, often veiling racism and violence towards minorities. In the scene where he assaults Milky, Combo feels hatred towards a man who is portrayed as genuinely good, speaking with kindness to everyone in the room, including a man who has proven himself to be racist. The audience is manipulated to sympathise with Milky through the dramatic and downbeat non-diegetic compiled music played over the beating. However, Milky is not the only victim of the hatred, as Combo himself breaks down, regretting his actions, and attacks the other members of his racing gang, screaming “I hate you” at men who share his ideology. Meadows not only influences the audience to disagree with Combo’s ideology and actions through the emphasis on his hatred and the use of non-diegetic composed music, but also shows the general destructive and chaotic nature of hate, which consumes everyone it affects.
An ideological critical approach is useful for analysing Trainspotting due to the films message on the benefits of hedonism, but the synonymous harm that such a lifestyle as Renton’s can involve. Although the film holds an implicit message about the carefree ideology of youth, conveyed through their focus on material pleasures and pursuit of fun, it balances the representation of the appeals and the harms of living such a way. For example, the film displays how such a way of living can be fun and mindless for the people living it, offering escapism through the use of drugs, e.g., when Renton overdoses and hallucinates literally sinking into the floor, completely escaping reality and the consequences of his actions, including his guilt for avoiding prison when his friend Spud was sentenced to jail time. At the same time, however, the film forces the audience to acknowledge and appreciate the harm that this approach to living can cause, and the self-destructive tendencies that Renton and his friends have developed as a result of their pursuit of pleasure. For example, while he is in a sort of transcendent ecstasy and surreal bliss during his overdose, Renton suffers an expressive and horrifying withdrawal afterwards where he hallucinates his friends mocking him and the baby he shares responsibility for the death of haunting him, showing that material pleasures can often lead to terrible consequences, and hedonism, while making for a life of easy fun and leisure, can have harmful side effects. However, it can also be argued that the film does not focus on conveying a strong message as much as it does creating an expressive and entertaining film through its style and playful nature. For example, Boyle uses expressive imagery to present the squalor that the characters live in to make the grim situation more funny for the audience, seen in the scene where Renton climbs down a toilet to retrieve a pair of pills. This is impossible, but the non-diegetic compiled score of tranquil ethereal music juxtaposed with this disgusting but comic imagery makes for a fun scene. Therefore, an ideological critical approach to Trainspotting is not as completely useful.
An ideological critical approach to This is England is much very useful due to the films explicit messages about the negative effects of patriotism and hatred. The audience is manipulated through the score to dislike Combo and be repulsed by his actions, conveying the pain that hate causes people, and also communicates the devastation that can be caused by a sense of entitlement due to ones own nationality by contrasting Combo’s actions, a man who embodies and represents hatred and nationalism, and news footage of the pain caused by the Falklands War, a war that England entered out of a vain sense of patriotism and entitlement to that land. Such an approach to Trainspotting is partially useful due to the films implicit messages about the recklessness of youth, and how hedonism, though fun, can cause agony too. This is done through the relatively balanced representation of the joys of living for pleasure, such as the ecstasy that Renton experiences through heroin, but the negative side-effects of such a lifestyle,e uh as his overdose and the subsequent withdrawal sequence. However, the film focuses heavily on creating a fast, comedic, stylish and expressive way of presenting these real and grim consequences of drug usage, more than it does on the effects of hedonism.
“Explore how the narratives of the films you have studied influence your response to key characters.”
Plan:
Intro – Trainspotting’s non-linear narrative influences younger audiences to be drawn to Renton and his lifestyle, presenting him as charismatic, enthusiastic and likeable. This Is England’s use of montage and an almost episodic narrative encourages the audience to empathise with Shaun, understand his descent into nationalism, and be repulses by Combo’s negative influence on his life.
1. Referencing the Opening sequence, Trainspotting’s use of ellipsis, fast-paced editing and rapid narration bridging it all to convey what Renton’s life is like, his appeal to younger audiences through pop culture references, punk/nihilistic attitude and poetic counter-Thatcherism monologue. Referencing the Fun With Friends and Racist Bother sequences, This Is England’s use of montage to encourage the audience to support and empathise with Shaun, done by conveying their personality in short sequences.
2. Referencing the London and Closing sequences, how Trainspotting encourages the audience to come to their own decisions on Renton through his acceptance and embrace of capitalism, and final rejection of nihilism, which his character has been largely built on until now. Referencing the Combo’s story montage and the racist bother sequence, This Is England’s manipulation of the audience through Meadows’ use of montage and manipulative non-diegetic compiled scores to influence the audiences to dislike Combo’s character.
Conclusion – Trainspotting uses expressive imagery and a non-linear , rapidly paced narrative bridged by his narration to encourage the audience to like Renton, but allows some independent reading of his character towards the end of the film, when Renton’s personality and character largely changes, accepting everything a lot of his charm and wit has been built off until now, his nihilistic attitude and hedonistic philosophy. This Is England uses montage and manipulative editing to encourage the audience to persistently empathise with snd understand Shaun, even during his descent into racism, whereas Combo is presented as evil, encouraging the viewer to dislike him constantly throughout the film.
Version 1:
Trainspotting’s narrative encourages the audience to respond to Renton in a positive way, using ellipsis and narration to present him as charismatic and engaging. This Is England uses montage and manipulative editing to encourage the audience to empathise with Shaun, as he is shown as innocent and good-natured, and oppose Combo, who is presented as hateful and violent.
In the opening sequence of Trainspotting, the 1977 track ‘Lust For Life’ by Iggy Pop plays, immediately establishing Renton’s interest in the music, making him more relatable to viewers who were around his age in the 1990s, when the film is set. Rapidly cut shots are connected by Renton’s omniscient narration, which is enthusiastic and poetic as he lists off stereotypically middle-class characteristics like “electrical tin openers”. The line “choose life” is a deliberate mocking of the anti-drug adverts that people Renton’s age would have been used to growing up, further making him relatable and charismatic. This nihilistic, punk attitude presents Renton as youthful, intelligent, fun. Match cuts connect random scenes displaying Renton’s hedonistic lifestyle, such as when the film cuts from him falling on a football pitch to him falling in a drug den. This conveys what his life is like to the audience: centred around pleasure and fun, which encourages the viewer to see him as easy-going. Even when trying to get off heroin, he is largely comedic and witty, claiming that his friend Sick Boy is lacking in “moral fibre”.
On the other hand, This Is England encourages the audience to empathise with Shaun throughout the film. In the Fun With Friends montage, the non-diegetic compiled soul music is upbeat and positive, reflecting the happiness that Shaun feels with his new friends. Slow motion is used in gliding, carefully framed shots of Shaun having innocent, childish fun with his new friends, jumping into puddles together. This is done in a deliberate attempt to influence the viewer to feel happy for Shaun. In the Racist Bother sequence, the audience is still encouraged to feel empathetic for him, regretful of his descent into racism. This is conveyed through a shot of Shaun, superimposed, walking through a graffitied underpass, displaying a literal descent into nationalism. The compiled, non-diegetic piano music is somber, sorrowful, manipulating the audience to feel sorry for Shaun for being indoctrinated into such a group, shown through the faded over image of the St. George’s flag against him and the gang waking, and the shot of Combo teaching Shaun how to act and talk like he does. This represents his loss of innocence, which the viewer is manipulated to feel upset by.
Trainspotting encourages the audience to respond to Renton independently through his abrupt acceptance of the previously rejected middle-class values mentioned in the ‘choose life’ monologue. The London montage is made up of conventionally shot images of typically London associated items, such as tourists, pigeons, famous street names. Non-diegetic compiled charted dance music popular at the time plays over the scene, making the sights feel vain, superficial. This signifies Renton’s shift in character, to choosing a career, choosing life. At the end of the film, his monologue serves as a direct contrast to his one at the start at the film, where he now embraces all the middle-class ideals he has avoided up until now. He accepts capitalism, Thatcherism, and rejects his previous nihilism. This encourages the audience to decide for themselves the morality of his actions, and the longitude of nihilism as a philosophy.
This Is England manipulates the audience into disliking Combo. In the Combo’s Story sequence, as Combo plays out a racist caricature of a black man, the diegetic sounds lower in the sound mix as the non-diegetic compiled score rises, another mournful piano tune, influencing the audience to feel aghast, disgusted at what Combo is saying. The use of reaction shots of Woody and Milky, who seem ashamed and embarrassed by what Combo is saying, also tell the audience how to respond to Combo. The film also focuses on the vitriol with which he says racial epithets, highlighting the pure hatred in the man. In the Racist Bother sequence, Combo is presented as both intimidating but also pathetic, as a brutal man of violent means who bullies children and harasses women, believing in the process that he is making a difference, acting as a force of good. In the closing sequence, the film uses news reel footage from the end of the Falklands War to juxtapose the consequences of the war with those of Combo’s actions. Britain is shown to have won an inconsequential island through a conflict which has caused scared, helpless prisoners of war, dead British soldiers, and fathers who never returned home, like Shaun’s. This contrasts Combo’s beating of Milky, and so forces the audience to confront the uselessness of Combo’s ideology, and that the only thing it causes is chaos and suffering.
Trainspotting uses it’s largely non-linear, fast-paced narrative and sharp narration bridging cuts to quickly communicate Renton’s witty and charismatic personality, influencing the audience to feel drawn to him. He is presented as intelligent, passionate, and having joie de vivre. In This Is England, Shaun is presented as naive, innocent, and childish, encouraging the audience to consistently empathise with him. The non-diegetic compiled score also serves to influence their responses to him, to regret his descent into nationalism and feel happy for him when he is happy with his friends. Combo, on the other hand, is consistently presented as cruel, needlessly violent and pathetic. The audience is coerced to hate him through the composed score and the juxtaposition between his actions and similar consequences of nationalism in history.
The films narrative is largely linear, however there is use of ellipsis in the montages, where time is compressed to convey information faster, and the montages themselves are expressive, shown what life is like in general through specific images, e.g., happiness in the fun with friends montage, shown through jumping in puddles and laughing with friends.
Key Elements:
Ideology:
The film never establishes what Shaun’s time in Combo’s gang did to his relationship with his other friends (Woody, Lol, etc.). By the ambiguity of whether or not Shaun’s life has been permanently stained/damaged by his time in Combo’s gang, the film shows that racism leads to harm for everyone. Milky, the victim of a hate crime, Combo, the regretful perpetuator of it, and Shaun, the helpless bystander, tied to the awful occurrence by his place in the gang. Even the other members of Combo’s gang were caught up in the chaos of the assault scene, assaulted by Combo as well, showing that racism is a poisonous whirlwind of violence that drags everyone up into it.
The film ends the same way it started, with a montage of news reel footage from the 1980s, here displaying the end of the Falklands War. The footage shows the spoils of the British victory: the raising of the Union Jack over a town hall in a small, unassuming village on a derelict island, scared and helpless POWs, dead British soldiers. This imagery displays the results of patriotism, when nationalism descends into violence, and what it costs, e.g., lost fathers, like Shaun’s. This questioning of the morality and necessity of nationalism and pride in one’s nation contrasts Combo’s own ideology. The film forces the audience to confront the question: what is the cost of nationalism? The juxtaposition of Britain’s violence and Combo’s likens the two, questioning the morality of both. What is the reward of the ideology of the people that Combo represents? The people that claim England to be a glorious land. By showing the results of that ‘glory’, the film explicitly tells the audience that this ideology only leads to pain and suffering.
Shaun throwing the St. George Cross into the ocean is an explicit symbol of a rejection of nationalism, of the hate that it can lead to. He even wears his normal skinhead clothing now, having rid himself of the hate he held while in Combo’s gang. The film here, using this imagery and the sorrowful non-diegetic compiled piano score, conveys its ideology to the audience that racism only leads to regret, violence, and loss. It influences the audience to agree with its ideology, done through Shaun breaking the fourth wall by looking directly into the camera at the end. The film is not interested in letting the audience make up their own mind, and so it is not true British social realism. This is an opinionated film with an explicit ideology that it influences the viewer to agree with, and the viewer would have to try very hard to have an oppositional or aberrant reading of the film.
As with previous montages, the camerawork in this one is more gliding and graceful, carefully framed, such as the shot that smoothly dolly’s backwards as Combo and his gang walk, in slow motion, towards it.
Ideology:
Shaun is shown being indoctrinated by Combo into the gang. He is told what epithets to say, how to talk to the ethnic minorities Combo targets, being cheered on by Combo and the others as he begins to walk and talk like they do. He is also shown in one shot of him walking through a graffitied underpass, which he is superimposed against, literally descending into a world of racism, far-right sentiment and nationalism.
Combo and his gang are presented as pathetic, but imposing. The characters are shown to be truly low, as they harass women and children, thinking that they are making a difference, or are in the right. In the shot shown below, they are even shown to be laughable, as Shaun wears a coat too-big for him, and Gadget walks like a thug. However, the men are also made intimidating through their use of fear to scare away the Muslim children. Combo carries a knife, and the group, in this way, reflect their real-life counterpart nationalists. Risible in appearance and nature, but intimidating in their methods.
Again, the film strays from the nature of true British social realism, as non-diegetic compiled piano music plays, somber and sorrowful, over the montage. This music tells the audience that what Combo and his gang is wrong, immoral, and Shaun’s growing inclusion into their ideology and methods is tragic, regrettable, a low point in the story. In this way, this sequence is a direct parallel to the one where Shaun has a fun day out with his friends, the other skinheads (non-racist ones). There, the non-diegetic compiled score is soul, upbeat and positive, giving the montage an optimistic mood, and manipulating the audience to feel happy for Shaun. Here, the mood is made more miserable and downtrodden by the despondent piano tune, influencing the audience to feel sad for Shaun, and regretful of the current events in the film.
This scene is the disruption of the equilibrium, a clearly defined turning point in the narrative where an infectious force of hatred worms its way into an otherwise picturesque friend group.
Key Elements:
The more gritty, real use of a handheld camera is done here to give the scene, in contrast to the montages, a more brutal and dark feel. In this way, the film has all the trappings of a British social realism film, except for the use of montage and manipulation. For example, as Combo continues with his story, performing an outrageous impression of a caricature black man, the diegetic sounds lower in the sound mix and a non-diegetic compiled somber piano score rises in the sound mix, juxtaposed with Milky and Woody’s ashamed expressions and Combo’s glee in his blatantly racist impression. This is manipulative, as the film is influencing the audience to feel repulsed by Combo’s story and impression, empathising with Milky, who has been singled out and humiliated here. A true kitchen sink drama would show the scene and allow the audience to come to their own decisions on the story and Combo’s character, rather than trying to tell them how to react to it. In other words, diegetic sound is the mark of true British social realism, so This Is England goes away from true British social realism by subduing its diegetic sounds in favour of a manipulative non-diegetic compiled score.
There is deliberate focus and emphasis on Combo’s use of racial epithets to highlight his sheer hatred, his rage towards ethic minorities. It highlights the poison and vitriol of his words, and the enthusiasm of his odium.
The camera focus is tightly on Combo in this scene, the camera close to his face, and he gets the majority of the screen time during his speech. However, the film cuts away to reaction shots of other characters, like Milky, who is clearly ashamed, angry and disapproving. The use of reaction shots here shows the clear divide between the people who are rightly embarrassed by Combo’s story, like Woody, and those who find it funny, like Gadget, foreshadowing the ,after split in the group, and conveying the hidden prejudices amongst some in the group.
Meadows uses montage to compress time and convey messages in short time spans. Here, an entire day out with friends is shown in a short montage, which communicates to the audience that Shaun has found a place in this friend group, and is happy with them.
The film is almost episodic, with the periodic use of montages acting as book markers dividing different segments of the story. For example, the first montage displays Shaun bored and sending his Summer alone, and after that he first meets the skinheads. In this montage, we see what his life is like now that he has friends to spend it with, but after this montage the equilibrium is disrupted, and Combo’s infectious character is introduced. After that, a montage is used to convey his negative influences on Shaun.
Key Elements:
During these montages, the film plays out almost opposite to how Trainspotting does. It uses a gliding steady cam, with carefully composed and framed shots , the use of slow motion. Whereas Boyle uses more chaotic, playful and interesting camerawork, This Is England is mostly more gritty and real in its camerawork, aside from in the montages, where the film becomes more conventionally pretty. For example, the montage os highly edited, even to the point that its doesn’t reflect reality, e.g., we see the gang jump into a pool three times.
The non-diegetic compiled score is soul music, the music that the skinhead group is formed on. The montage also takes place against the backdrop of a deprived urban landscape with graffiti, showing the setting they live in. Clips of Shaun having fun with friends,played in slow motion to emphasise his happiness, show his acceptance into this new, surrogate family. The clips also show off the inclusive nature of the group, which contains men, women, black and white people, younger and older people. They are all bonded by their shared sense of fashion, taste in music, and eccentricity as a group. They are no the cool kids, so to speak, rather a group living on the outskirts, an edgy group. They are from a particular subculture, and they gang together. They are also given a childlike innocent by being shown jumping into puddles together, laughing giddily.
The film is prevented from being true British social realism through the manipulative editing that encourages the audience to react to the film in certain ways. For example, in this sequence, the upbeat, lively compiled music juxtaposed with the shots of Shaun and his friends having fun influences the audience to feel happy for him, which is not true to the subjective nature of kitchen sink dramas.
Meadows as a director favours the use of montage, which he uses frequently in This Is England. The film immediately begins with news reel footage from events and examples of pop culture in Britain in the 1970s, such as skinhead fashion, the Falklands War, Margaret Thatcher, nationalism. This is done for the same reason that Boyle opens Train spotting with Lust For Life by Iggy Pop: to immerse the audience in the time period, conveying the attitudes and mood of the time.
For example, the non-diegetic compiled score used is soul music, the music that the skinhead gangs are formed around an appreciation for. Milky, later on in the film, refers to himself as one of the original skinheads. The juxtaposition of soul music here and news reel footage of racist skinheads at rallies conveys the infiltration of racist nationalists into the skinhead subculture.
The conflicts present at the time are conveyed through the contrast between black music and racist rallies, violence with pop culture, Thatcher with miner strikes. The film then transitions from this montage into Shaun’s bedroom, which contains a photo of his deceased, military father, and a radio playing a broadcast of people discussing Thatcher’s politics, immediately rooting Shaun in this time period, and to an extent a product of it. He is part of the films hyper real reflection if 1983 working class Britain.
The film is narratively satisfying, coming full circle by the end. Renton’s motivations were established at the start of the film, and now his change in motivations/actions has been explained,. Despite the fact that we don’t know what happens to him or the other characters next, the story has been finished, having told the story that it set out to tell.
Key Elements:
At the beginning of this sequence, the camerawork has calmed down, with a higher use of static shots, with a signifying the calm before the storm. Renton, too, seems to have lost his cool confidence, now acting more cautious than he did when he was someone with no care for the consequences of his actions. This change in behaviour and filmmaking signifies a shift in Renton’s world.
Ideology:
The narration, too, is less poetic here, more an explanation of why Renton chose to betray his friends. It is less nihilistic, more pragmatic, even confessional in tone. As his explanation has a moment to sink in, there is a call back to the poetry of the narration at the start of the film. Renton begins an almost reversed versions of that one, with the same rhythm, cadence, but a different delivery, like a mirror image of the first monologue. He now accepts and embraces ‘life’, capitalism, Thatcherism, rejecting nihilism and hedonism. In this way, the film argues that nihilism ultimately fails, leading to nothing, and mist give way to pragmatism.
The montage begins with sudden, jarring stock footage of thongs that are distinctively from London. Rapidly edited shots of pigeons, ice cream, tourists, double decked buses and famous street sign convey the new location to us, alongside the use of current dance chart music from the time, a switch from the cool retro compiled music used before. This use of shallow chart music that would have been popular at the time signals a change to a new place. Even the camerawork loses its signature playful flourishes, reverting to a more conventional style of cinematography, signifying Renton’s turn to consumerism and some level of ‘normality’ in modern life, and a turning point in the film.
Ideology:
The use of new chart music and the distinctively London things serve as the embodiment of all the things that Renton rejects in his initial ‘choose life’ monologue. The typical working-class values are embodied here in the montage of a modern, bright metropolis. It also signifies Renton starting a new chapter in his life, accepting capitalism, work as an estate agent, and a rejection of heroin, hedonism, etc.
Renton’s fast paced, energetic and almost poetic narration connects the scenes in the film, acting as a bridge to maintain a constant fast pace. His narration is accompanied by visuals, such as when Begbie finishes Renton’s sentence, speaking directly to the audience and thereby breaking the fourth wall. His narration is rhythmic, bridging the large ellipses between scenes, which are used to compress time in this opening sequence to give the audience an introduction to the lives and personalities of these characters.
Key Elements:
The film opens with an ‘in media res‘, or a cold open, immediately cutting to a low angle shot of feet running from an unseen threat, then cutting to Renton and Spud, who we do not know, running from security guards for reasons we do not know. This is done too shock the audience, throwing them into the story and the pace of the film, overwhelming them with the sudden information. The song ‘Lust for Life’ by Iggy Pop plays to the scene, lending an upbeat energetic pace to the scene, but also conveying the shared culture and tastes of the protagonists, who would have grown up listening to this type of music, as it was released in 1977.
The film is rapidly edited with unusual angles, a playful style of cinematography, such as the arching shot of Renton on the floor. Another example of the playful editing and camerawork is the action match between Renton falling on the football pitch to him falling in the drug den. It uses freeze frames and captions to introduce the ensemble cast of characters, which also breaks the fourth wall, a narratively engaging strategy. The film also uses highly exaggerated, heightened mise en scen, such as the red drug den and the green hallway outside it. The film is rooted in British social realism, but presents a grim situation in a mostly comedic, fun, even exotic way.
The film is highly expressive, conveying the lives and circumstances of the protagonists in a light, comedic, even cartoonish way. For example, the film conveys Renton’s addiction and his struggles to get off heroin through the comically jagged planks of wood that he uses to lock himself in his room. He then comedically breaks these down to escape, which is unrealistic, and so the film is not true to British social realism, but presents the grim subject matter in a lighthearted and fun way. It is storytelling through metaphor. This is most done i8n the ‘worst toilet in Scotland’ scene, where Renton literally climbs into a toilet to retrieve some suppositories. In the next scene, he is soaking wet, even though we, the audience, understand that he did not actually climb in. The toilet itself is comically and unrealistically dirty, to the point of absurdism. This is a metaphor, done to convey the filth and squalor that Renton lives through in a funny and comedic way.
Ideology:
Renton’s omniscient narration plays over the scene. In it, he sarcastically mocks the ‘choose life’ anti-drug campaign, in which he rejects stereotypical middle-class values, instead embracing hedonism, approaching life in a nihilistic way, rejecting the status quo, authority, social conventions and aspirations. He instead chooses to live a life for pleasure, claiming, “why? There are no reasons. Who needs reasons when you’ve got heroin?”.
His message has a strong counter-culture message to appeal to the younger audiences. Renton has an angry, defiant punk attitude, and is made likeable through his intelligence, charm, and enthusiasm. The 1970/80s cultural references are targeted at the more youthful audience, e.g., Sick Boy talking about James Bond, making pop culture references for the younger British generation watching.
These stills from the opening sequence convey the pace and disjointed scenes used to introduce us to the characters and the story.
The film begins with an ‘In media res’, or a cold open, beginning with a jarring shot of feet running from an unseen threat, belonging to an unseen person, with the non-diegetic compiled score playing ‘Lust For Life’ by Iggy Pop. The song is fast paced and upbeat, lending an immediate momentum and energy to the film. It also reflects a shared culture between the characters, who would have listened to this music from 1977 as they were growing up. It creates a sense of camaraderie between them, as they like the same music.
The film does not have a linear narrative, as the event we are currently seeing takes place about halfway through the story, just before Renton and Spud are arrested for theft. The scene itself is non-linear, randomly cutting to a disjointed football game and using freeze frames to introduce each individual character.
The editing style of the film keeps it in constant momentum, a rapid pace of progression immediately established through the cold open, accompanied by the jarring narration, an action sequence and lively music. They narration is used in the film to branch between scenes, so there is either something on screen keeping the audience engaged, or Renton’s all-knowing narration to keep them immersed in the story. This is why the film feels so quick. An example of this constant motion through editing is the motion match between Renton falling on the football pitch and him falling in the drug den.
The pace of the film is also kept fast by the almost constant camera movement, which keeps momentum between hard cuts from one scene to another. The camera movement is also accentuated through the fluid character movements, as they run on the football pitch or run from security guards through the streets, or just fall backwards onto a floor. The choice of songs also compliments the film, as ‘Lust for Life’ plays over the monologue accepting drugs and rejecting middle-class social values, and later in the film, ‘Mile End’ plays during the grim flat-share between Renton and Begbie in an increasingly trashed London flat. They also contribute to the pace of the film, the tone and pace of the songs matching that of the scenes, e.g., ‘Lust for Life’ is fast and lively. The pace is also contributed to through the almost poetic screenplay. This can be seen in the visual accompaniment of the narration, for example when Renton describes how much he hates when people say… then the film cuts out Begbie speaking directly to the camera in a dollying in low angle shot about how much he looks down on the use of heroin.
The films rapid momentum is also maintained through the blurring of time, done through huge time compressions and ellipsis. In this way, one sequence seamlessly leads into another. This can be seen in the transition to London as a location for the film, the city being introduced in a montage of shots of things that are clearly from London, e.g., famous street names, ice cream, tourists and pigeons. Parallel editing is also used to tell multiple stories at once, such as what happens to Spud, Renton and Tommie after the night at the club, which sets up later aspects of the film, like when Tommie becomes addicted to heroin due to his grief at losing his girlfriend.
The cinematography is also unique and interesting, as the film frequently uses jarring camera angles, e.g., the low angle shot from behind the men guarding the football net. This playfulness prevents the film from becoming too mired down in the grim situation the characters are in, and so the film is not a kitchen sink drama, more an expressive and often comedic depiction of careless drug use.
In the middle of the otherwise fast paced narrative, the film’s momentum slows down in an interlude, during which the main characters visit the great outdoors, where only diegetic sounds are used and the editing pace slows down. This brings our attention to Renton’s nihilistic outburst, keeping the audiences focus away from how the film was made and instead on Renton’s message, in which he mocks Scotland for being colonised by an even worse country.
Another instance in which the narrative sows along with the tone of the film is the sequence in which we learn of the neglected baby’s death. The editing slows done, the non-diegetic compiled score subdues, the film returns to more traditional camera work, and our attention is kept on the distress of the mother, and, like the characters, we are forced to confront the horrific situation that these people are in due to their addiction. This scene is one of the only in the film. That does not present a grim situation in a light-hearted and fun way, through playful cinematography, music, poetic narration or expressive dialogue or imagery.
This Is England:
Whereas Trainspotting begins with a cold open to immediately immerse the audience in the world of the protagonists, This Is England begins with news reel stock footage from the 1980s, establishing the political climate of Britain in that time period. Culture is shown through footage of shows like Knight Rider and characters like Roland Rat, and the politics are established through footage of Margaret Thatcher, the Miner’s Strike, the Falklands War, Iranian Embassy Siege. This immerses us in the world that Shaun lives in. It conveys the mood of the time, a time of turmoil and change, and a lot of anger. Just showing Thatcher alone communicates this, as she was infamous amongst the working class for being highly pro-capitalist, conservative, with policies of privatisation and union limitation. Soul music is also played, as this was the origins of the skinhead movement; people dressed like that and shaved their heads to show their love for soul music, a traditionally black, cultural music form. Over time, this fashion movement was infiltrated and taken over by far-right nationalists, and this is what Milky and Combo dress the same way in the film. Different ideologies, same clothing. Milky even claims to be one of the first skinheads in the film.
Shots of the derelict area in which the film is set, working class homes in the town of Grimsby, establish the environment in which the protagonist lives. It also conveys an impact of Margaret Thatcher’s new house building schemes, which were intended to provide modern housing to replace the slums formed after WW2, but this housing soon became run-down and homogenous in appearance. A later shot of an abandoned, run down church with anti-Thatcher graffiti on it further conveys the attitudes of the area of society that Shaun lives in. Meadows uses this montage of visuals and music that define the era to root us in the setting of the story.
The films narrative is linear, the story and plot running largely in parallel. Meadows makes large use of ellipsis, however, to compress time, alongside montage to convey information. For example, when Shaun spends his summer holidays alone, and a montage with large time compressions is used to convey his loneliness. The same goes for when he is having a day out with the gang, where the film hard cuts to random shots of him and his friends hanging out and having fun. Upbeat, jovial music is okayed int eh non-diegetic composed score here to manipulate the audience into feeling happy for Shaun, alongside conveying his happiness at that time. The film is almost episodic in that there are large periods of linear storytelling before the use of a montage and large ellipsis. The disruption of equilibrium occurs in the bridge to the second half of the film, when Combo returns from prison.
Key Elements:
Trainspotting:
The film is highly expressive, using unique camera movements, lively pup music and unrealistic scenarios to convey addiction. In this way, the film gets to the truth of heroin addiction through comedy. For example, the scene where Sick Boy opens up his show sole to reveal a compact kit of heroin in there, which he then takes, despite wearing a suit. This moment, alongside the one in which Renton comedically breaks through a boarded up door to find heroin, are both cartoonish in nature, conveying the filth and squalor that they live in in a fun way. This can also be seen in the contrast between the highly red drug den and the oddly green hallway that the baby sits in as its mother takes heroin. Another example is when the scenes of the guys thieving places are played in montage, the music matched to the visuals, or when Tommy physically can’t lose the pool game with Begbie. Also, the use of classical music played over ‘the worst toilet in Scotland’ scene, an expressive moment itself, contrasting the filth of the moment with beautiful music, is played off for comedic effect.
This is England:
Shane Meadows takes subject matter that would traditionally be considered British social realism, but makes the films in a way that prevents them from being exactly kitchen sink dramas. This is because of his use of non-diegetic compiled music to in fluency the audiences reaction to the film. For example, when Combo returns from prison and immediately begins to spread his racist views, the diegetic score slowly subdues in the mix and the somber, emotionally manipulative non-diegetic compiled piano music rises in the sound mix. This is done to influence the audiences emotions here, influencing them to sympathise with Milky and oppose Combo. The exact same thing is done as Combo assaults Milky towards the end of the film, where we are manipulated to feel repulsed, horrified at what is happening.
Ideology:
The opening monologue by the omniscient Renton, separate from the one we see on screen, is a deliberate mockery of the ‘Choose Life’ anti-drug slogan. He sarcastically lists off typical, stereotypical characters of middle-class life like “electrical tin openers” and “compact disc players”. The monologue rejects these, and Renton claims that he chose something else, and why? There are no reasons when you’ve got heroin, he says. They reject an ideal life, career, family, etc. and instead choose heroin because they simply find it fun, pleasurable. This is a hedonistic ideology, as the characters embrace the pursuit of self-indulgence and arbitrary pleasure above all else. This can also be seen through Renton’s manic laugher at samosa being killed by a car, and the characters’ enjoyment of the hectic football game, or Renton’s seeming euphoria from smoking. It can also be argued that the film has a nihilistic ideology, as the characters reject all moral principles and accept life as meaningless, which Renton seems to be implying in this opening monologue. At the end of the film, Renton goes directly against this opening monologue, accepting this lifestyle, “choosing life”. In a sense, capitalism and Thatcherianism triumph. In this way, the film seems to claim that, ultimately, hedonism must give way to pragmatism, and nihilism leads to nothing.
Renton, despite his clear flaws, is immediately established as a likeable character. He is charismatic, and there is a poetry, even an intelligence too his opening monologue. This can also be seen in his monologue about Scotland, which itself is nihilistic, as he comments on the grim nature of his country, which he describes as a useless backwater nation of “wankers” colonised by “wankers”, and “all the fresh air in the world won’t make a fucking difference”.
This is England:
In the scene where Combo and his gang visit the political meeting in the rural pub, we get an insight into the operation of this organisation. In the 1980s, these political organisations that opposed immigration would campaign, but also used fear mongering tactics and violence against minorities, here represented by Combo. Combo himself speaks some logic to Shaun, which convinces him to join his gang. He speaks on the injustices and pointlessness of the Falklands War, which affected many people at the time, including Shaun, but targets his hate on the wrong group; minorities. His long monologue is done to remind audiences who were alive at that time period of some of the things they would have been hearing at the time, so Meadows is setting him up as a violent, hateful man, but one with a logic, despite how flawed it is. It shows how fine the line is between his political views and his prejudice, how one can lead to another, and what sort of thinking and ideology was attractive to these far-right nationalists. The justification for his hate towards the war is later shown through news reel footage from the time used in another manipulative montage towards the end of the film, in which we see what the war and the suffering it caused has achieved; a single, small village and scared, unarmed POWs.
This same footage is played right after Combo assaults Milky, cutting from him carrying Milky’s passed out body away, to a news reel shot of a British soldier erecting a Union Jack on a town hall roof in the Falklands. The film intentionally does this to contrast Combo’s actions with that of the British army. We see all that Combo’s ideology has achieved is violence and an almost dead friend, whereas the army has taken helpless POWs, lost lives, and all for the insignificant village shown. In this way, Meadows clearly communicated his opinion in a way that the audiences would have to work very hard to disagree with from watching the film. This is also conveyed in Shaun’s literal disposal of the St George’s Cross flag, a symbol of nationalism, into the ocean. The film argues that nationalism and racism cannot survive, and leads to nothing but violence. It also harkens back to the the behaviour of his gang earlier on in the film. Despite their intimidating appearance as a gang, as individuals they are pathetic, even laughable, who bully kids and harass women. They can put as much effort into a cause to belief, but in the end, what good does it do? The film is also conveying the dangers of patriotism in the juxtaposition between Combo’s ideology and imagery of the Falklands War. Combo’s obsession with pride in his country, and the country’s feeling of obligation to protect any meagre area of land it owns due to a sense of patriotism are shown to have harmful effects on innocent people, such as the fathers and wives waiting for the men to come home from the war, the POWs, the lined up bodies, and Milky, the women in the underpass, and the boys playing football. This is the result in pride over ones country, the film argues, and the rejection of these beliefs can be seen in Shaun throwing the England flag in the sea at the end of the film, both rejecting Combo’s ideals and vain patriotism.
Shane Meadows typically produces films that verge on being Cinéma vérité, or kitchen sink dramas, due to their subject matter. Kitchen sink dramas are social realism films set in the Uk, and they follow everyday life, are typically gritty and discomforting to watch, dealing with social issues like crime and poverty. Meadows’ films tend to follow characters living in working-class Britain, experiencing aspects of that society what reflect the time period they are set in. For example, This Is England follows young Shane, whose father has died in the Falklands War, which he copes with by joining a gang of skinheads, who themselves become a vestige of blatant racism that grew in expression in 1980s Britain. It also contains background imagery that represents a rise in anti-Thatcher sentiment at the time, and a rise in anti-Muslim activism and political campaigning.
In this way, his films reflect many of the qualities of kitchen sink dramas. However, they are not kitchen sink dramas, rather Meadow’s own execution of real social aspects of Britain in his films. This is largely due to the fact that his films attempt to manipulate the audience, e.g., through music. He uses non-professional actors much of the time and largely fluid scripts that are only set in stone a short time before filming begins, with the actors improving much during rehearsal. They include themes like violence, which Shane experienced in abundance during his childhood. “The Velocity, the hatred, someone stamping someone’s face into the corner of a room. – That never leaves you.”. He often tries to emphasise how heroic it is for some people to just live a normal life. “For some people just to lead a sober life is heroic, way better than running a conglomerate or making political decisions.”
Many of his films feature the use of fake father figures that his more youthful characters wrongly put their hopes and aims onto. He examines the negative effects of an older, dangerous stranger on a happy friend group, which he also has experience in his younger years, such as when he was kidnapped and held at knife point by an ex-boyfriend of his girlfriend. In fact, many of his films and characters are inspired by his own stories. He straddles the line with kitchen sink dramas. When he was young, he supported runaway’s from children’s homes. He joined a skinhead gang around the age of 11 for protection from bullying, some of which was aimed at his father, and got involved in petty crime like stealing and drug-usage. He became violent himself, in one instance encouraging the older-boyfriend of his sister to beat up a younger, innocent kid.
He uses his own personal trauma to help make his films, which he in-turn uses to help his trauma. This is why so many of his stories are so personal, e.g., Shaun from This Is England serving as an alter-ego for Shane when he was younger. This explains why characters like Woody in the film are often portrayed as father-figures, and we see the descent into hate from a more understandable perspective, but still see it in all its ugliness and brutality, as Shane did in his youth.
This Is England (Shane Meadows, 2007) follows young Saun, a lonely boy who suffers from bullying who finds friendship in the open arms of a local gang of skinheads. At first, he enjoys the company of his new friends, but events turn sour when an old member of the group, Combo, returns from prison, and begins to spread his poisonous and racist views amongst them.
The film follows a linear narrative, told mostly through the perspective of Sean, which makes us sympathise with him, despite his eventual belief in Combo’s racist preachings. We understand why he listens to Combo, why he feels accepted and safe in the skinhead gang, and how he becomes further engrained in their society throughout the film.
I personally enjoyed the film! I felt that it was ruthlessly realist in its portrayal of anti-Muslim hate groups. The film is frequently disturbing, interspersed with comfortable dialogue scenes that keep the viewer on-edge. The way that it portrays an innocent boy’s descent into racism is believable and tragic, and it has one of the most terrifying film antagonists I’ve ever seen! I rate This Is England (Shane Meadows, 2007) four stars!
Areas like Greater Manchester and London were a few of many English and Scottish cities that experiences major heroin outbreaks during the mind 1980s, Western Britain being mostly effected in particular. These outbreaks affected predominantly 18 to 25 year olds who more mostly unemployed and living in deprived urban areas. Addictions usually lasted many years and led to involvement tin crimes like drug dealing and prostitution. Young people largely avoided heroin in the early 1990s, but rumours in 199 indicated that the ‘heavy end’ drug may be making a return.
Danny Boyle directed and produced Trainspotting. In interviews he has claimed that he likes to shoot low budget and work through his films “inch by inch” with a sense of naivety in the filmmaking process, not having a fully formulated, rigid plan to stick to. He prefers to shoot through wide shots, framing characters in landscapes. He also like his actors to “physicalise” his films and convey their emotions through their body language, likely due to his history as a state director. He also aims to create a “visceral energy” through. His films through the pace and movement of it. He also claims that 70-80% of a movie is sound, and without good sound a movie cannot succeed.
The author of the original Trainspotting book, Irvine Welsh, has said that he likes to include moral complexity in his works, avoiding clearly cut good/bad guys, using interesting characters to for the audience to follow. He wants his readers to think “God, these are real people that are going through real conflicts; life isn’t coming easy to them, they have to make decisions and try to navigate the consequences of their actions.”.
The film revitalised the career of Iggy Pop, a rock/punk artist at his height in the 1990s. His song ‘Lust For Life’ became deeply connected with the I’ll, many people recognising it as being from Trainspotting. Released in 1977, the track is an exemplification of rock/dance music of the time the film is set in, one cultural aspect of the late 1980s and early 1990s that are depicted in the film.
Trainspotting (Danny Boyle, 1996), follows a group of heroin addicts living in Edinburgh in the 1990s, specifically Renton, who falls in and out of addiction, withdrawal, petit crime and redemption.
The film is highly surreal, following a group of characters whom frequently communicate directly to the audience, such as Renton, who makes ironic commentaries on society and heroin through an internal monologue. The film also uses abstract imagery to evoke the horror of drug addictions, such as the horrors that Renton hallucinated while experiencing withdrawal, and the characters will often swap between places and times at unrealistic paces to convey a sense of lost time and wasted adulthood. The film also uses this abstract imagery and poetic, social realism to convey the experience of a heroin addiction in scenes to immerse the viewer in then position of the characters.
The narrative is told in a unique way, as the beginning scene takes place chronologically about a third of the way into the film, and events happen in quick succession, the periods of time between them sometimes minuscule when it was a long time chronologically.
I personally loved the film’s fluid pace, gripping characters and harrowing but immersive sequences. I rate Trainspotting 5 stars!!!
Component 1c looks at two films, Trainspotting (Danny Boyle, 1996) and This Is England (Shane Meadows, 2006), with the specialist study areas ideology and narrative.
2021 Autumn exam questions:
To how useful has an ideological critical approach been in analysing the films you have studied? Refer in detail to one or more sequences from each film.
2022 Summer exam questions:
Discuss how one or more specific narrative devices enhance the dramatic qualities of the films you have studied.
Explore how far the two films you have studied demonstrate the filmmakers’ attempt to control the spectator’s response.
Plan:
Intro – The filmmakers of Winter’s Bone demonstrated this to a large extent, as the spectators are encouraged to emphasise with the female characters, specifically Ree, who represents a group of repressed women, and encourages the audience to oppose the men in the film, who are represented as oppressive and ignorant. No Country For Old Men does not demonstrate this to as much an extent, as the film’s deliberate denial of conventional audience viewing pleasures, like a satisfying ending or a climax to a tense scene, leaves the film’s messages and themes more open to interpretation.
Winter’s Bone squirrel dream sequence, how it encourages us to emphasise with Ree.
Winter’s Bone squirrel gutting sequence, how Teardrop is represented as belittling and arrogant, in contrast with Ree, who is presented as an unconventional parental figure.
No Country For Old Men opening sequence, the film does demonstrate the attempts to provoke the audience to feel disgust at the killings, and like Moss through his careful and wise demeanour. However, his tracking the money and not giving the suffering man any water contradicts this, and presents him as a more ambiguous protagonist, one who we may not like.
Coin toss sequence, how Anton is made ambiguous by showing the man mercy against our expectations, and also how the scene denies conventions and allows the audience to come to their own conclusions/responses on the themes, meanings, characters of the film.
Ending sequence – no shootout, sudden character death, one character simply retiring, all leads to a denial of convention, forcing the audience to come to their own conclusions, also seen in cars crash scene and Anton’s reasons for killing Jean.
Conclusion – Winter’s Bone demonstrates the filmmaker’s attempts to control the spectator’s ]response, but No Country For Old Men largely doesn’t.
Essay:
Winter’s Bone demonstrates the filmmaker Debra Granik’s attempts at controlling the spectator’s response to a large extent due to the encouragement for them to empathise with the women of the film and oppose the men via representations of the two groups. However, the filmmakers of No Country For Old Men, the Coen Brothers, do not attempt to control the spectator’s response as to as high an extent, as the film denies many audience expectations and conventional viewing pleasures to encourage and allow them to come to their own conclusions.
Winter’s Bone demonstrates Debra Granik’s attempts at controlling the spectator’s response to a large extent, as seen in the squirrel dream sequence, where the spectator is encouraged to empathise with the protagonist Ree. The squirrel in the dream is shown to represent Ree through the juxtaposition of shots of it and smaller squirrels, reflecting Ree’s responsibility as a protector of her younger siblings. The increase in the editing pace of shots of the squirrel, in distress, alongside a sharp and jarring rise in the diegetic sound mix of a wood-saw, shows that the squirrel in terrified at the sign of impending danger, further shown through shots of trees burning, and the squirrel clinging onto its tree, its home. The spectator is encouraged, therefore, to sympathise with Ree, shown here to be clearly struggling to protect her home and family from the impending danger of repossession and homelessness in the winter. We also associate the blaring diegetic sound of wood-saws with the men of this traditional rural community, showing them to be the source of Ree’s struggle. Therefore, the filmmaker’s attempt to influence the spectator to empathise with Ree and oppose the men who are causing her problems, reflected in this dream sequence.
The filmmakers of Winter’s Bone also attempt to control the spectator’s response to admire Ree and her tenacity as a parental figure, and oppose the film’s antagonists, men, represented by Teardrop in the squirrel gutting sequence. Here, Ree is shown to be an unconventional role model to her siblings, teaching them to hunt despite being a woman, filling in a traditionally male role in this patriarchal community. The low angle shot of her aiming a rifle with the two younger siblings beneath her highlight her strength and defiance of the conventions of the male-dominated system. In this way, Granik attempts to influence the spectator to respect Ree, who goes against unlikely odds in this orthodox, sexist community for the sake of her family’s welfare. The audience is also influenced to oppose and dislike the men of the community, represented by Teardrop, whose clothing is dirty, with an unkept face that presents him as a repulsive human being. He belittles Ree by grabbing her face, showing that he feels he has power over her, as he is a man, and also mocks her by waving cocaine in her face, taking some himself and so highlighting the character’s degradation. Ree’s defiance, however, by meeting his eyes and refusing to be intimidated by his aggression, further encourages the spectator to support her and root against Teardrop.
Whereas Winter’s Bone demonstrates it’s filmmakers’ attempts to control the spectator’s response to a large extent, No Country For Old Men makes it’s themes more ambiguous and, therefore, open to interpretation, as seen in the opening sequence. At first, the spectator is encouraged to view Anton as a clear-cut villain and Moss as a stoic protagonist. The brutality of Anton’s initial murders of innocent people in contrast to his seeming lack of emotion represents him as an inhuman sociopath, and so the spectator is encouraged to disagree with this actions. Moss, on the other hand, is portrayed as calm, composed and intelligent, carefully surveying a crime scene and assessing where the money could have gone to with a careful methodology, presenting him as a responsible, experienced veteran. Therefore, the spectator is encouraged by the filmmakers to support him on his journey. However, the characters are not entirely clear-cut in how they are represented as good or bad. Moss, for example, does not aid the dying man begging for water, and kills a wild animal while hunting, which presents him as cold and relatively uncaring of other’s suffering. He also decides to steal the money he finds, with no explanation of why he does so. The spectator, therefore, is allowed to read the character’s actions independently, and may decide that he is doing it so support his family, or out of simple greed. In this way, the protagonist is not entirely good or conventional, and is left more ambiguous through his actions. Therefore, the Coen Brothers do not always attempt to control the spectator’s response.
The filmmakers No Country For Old Men also allow the spectator to respond independently of their influence or direction through the actions of Anton in the coin toss sequence. Here, Anton is established further as a cruel and intimidating figure, who seems to enjoy threatening an innocent gas station clerk and seeing the man’s frightened reactions and desperateness to get away from Anton, as evidenced by the line “You don’t know what your’e talking about” when the man says that he needs to close his shop. This prompts the audience to further dislike Anton’s character, however, the scene ends, surprisingly, without any bloodshed, Anton allowing the man to live because of his lucky call of a coin toss. This presents Anton as a man who only kills out of necessity, as seen in his murder of the police officer in the opening sequence to escape the police station. This small level of benevolence further perpetuates Anton’s image as an embodiment of death, leaving the spectator to come to their own conclusions on the character. Even if their reading of the film is aberrant, the Coen Brothers allow them to make respond to the messages and themes of No Country Of Old Men, without being fed information through explicit character actions.
The Coen Brothers also do not attempt to control the spectator’s response in the ending sequence of No Country Of Old Men. In this sequence, the film ends in an anti-climatic way, Moss being killed offscreen before his final duel with Anton, and Sheriff Bell simply retiring. This abrupt and emotionally unsatisfying ending goes against typical western movie conventions where the distinctly and recognisable good protagonist triumphs against the detestable and undoubtedly bad antagonist, instead allowing the villain to live while the hero dies randomly and without dignity, shown to be lying in his own blood in a random motel doorway, killed by a group of unknown gangsters. The abrupt conclusion to this rivalry does not try to coerce the spectator into feeling happy or frustrated with the ending, as the ambiguous nature of the ending instead encourages them to come to their own conclusions. Although most audience members will likely feel unsatisfied at the sudden ending, they are given the freedom by the filmmakers to make their own minds up on what the meaning of the film is, and to respond in an individual way, rather than a conventional ending to the story telling them how to feel, i.e happy that the villain failed. The ending sequence also allows the spectator to respond independently by again presenting Anton as a somewhat merciful figure. Although he hunts done Carla Jean because of his promise to Moss to kill her, he gives her the option of staking her life on the coin toss. Her refusal to play, in his philosophy, essentially forfeits her life, and so the murder is to him, justified. Even though the spectator is encouraged to sympathise with Jean through her loss of husband and mother and clearly mourning for the deaths, having done nothing herself to provoke Anton’s aggression. Still, the spectator, while likely viewing Anton as cruel and uncaring, will see that he has a code he sticks to, and Jean refused her chance at survival, and so are given some measure of independence here in responding to the film Therefore, No Country For Old Men demonstrates it’s filmmakers’ attempts at controlling the spectator’s response to a small extent.
Winter’s Bone demonstrates it’s filmmakers’ attempts at controlling the spectator’s response to a large extent, as Debra Granik influences the audience to emphasise with and support Ree, a strong woman who stands against the injustices and inequalities of a male-dominated, sexist society, and encourages the spectator to oppose said society and the oppressive men in it, represented by the repulsive and mocking Teardrop. No Country For Old Men, however, demonstrates it’s filmmakers’ attempts at controlling the spectator’s response to a small extent as, although they are encouraged to view Anton as cruel and Moss as stoic and wise, both characters are given a sense of ambiguity, through Anton’s harsh but strict moral code and Moss’s cold lack of compassion and the ambiguous reasons for stealing the money, alongside the unconventional ending that does not force or encourage the spectator to respond positively to a typical victory of good over evil. Instead, neither side wins, and the spectator is allowed to decide the meaning and significance of the abrupt conclusion.
How valuable has ideological analysis been in developing your understanding of the themes of your chosen films?
Plan:
Intro – Very important, as a feminist ideological analysis allows for various meanings to be extracted from a film with an implicit ideology, winters bone, which comments on feminism in an anti-feminist world. It would not be as effective an approach to no country for old men as an approach of determinism, which allows for the films implicit messages about the important role of chance in death to be analysed.
A feminist ideological analysis has been very valuable in an analysis of winters bone due to the films implicit messages about the inequality of genders and traditionalist gender roles in a rural, orthodox community (Insert Granik quote), e.g., opening sequence.
It has also been valuable due to the films denial of the male gaze and passing of the bechdell test (insert context here). It also goes against the patriarchal traditions of a male-dominated society by utilising a strong protagonist and villainous male characters who serve as obstacles to her, e.g., cattle market sequence.
No country for old men is better analysed through a deterministic ideological approach, due to the films implicit emphasis on chance and randomness in death, e.g., coin toss sequence.
An ideological approach of chance is also valuable due to the films abrupt conclusion, which also emphasises the role of chance in fate, e.g., ending sequence.
A feminist ideological analysis of Winter’s Bone (Debra Granik, 2010) is very valuable, as it allows for the films implicit messages about inequality in male-dominated society and the strength of an unconventional female protagonist. A deterministic ideological approach is more valuable in developing understanding of the themes of No Country For Old Men (Coen Brothers, 2007).
Essay:
A feminist ideological analysis is very valuable in understanding the themes of Winter’s Bone due to they film’s implicit messaged about the impacts of inequality between men in women in a traditional, patriarchal society. A feminist analysis of No Country For Old Men is less valuable, but a deterministic approach would be valuable due to the films messages about the role of chance and the random nature of death.
A feminist ideological approach is very valuable for developing an understanding of the themes of Winter’s Bone, as the film is “a feminist film about an anti-feminist world”. This can be seen in the representation of gender roles in the opening sequence of the film, where Ree, a young woman, takes paternal responsibility and cares for her family, e.g., combing her ill mothers hair and walking her younger siblings to school. She is shown to have traditionally masculine traits, e.g., she clearly desires to enter the military, as seen in her longing look through a window at students training to join. This is in defiance of the men in the rural, isolated Ozarks community, who are shown to have dominance and the roles of protectors, such as when Tonya’s husband warningly approaches the Sheriff at the end of the scene with a knife, showing him to consider the property his territory, protecting the women in it. This shows that there is a clear gender divide, as the women, like Tonya, passively care for the cattle and the land, while the men hunt, as evidenced by the dead game that Tonya and her husband cut up. Therefore, a feminist ideological approach is very valuable in understanding the themes of the film, as the film comments on the inequalities of a traditional, patriarchal society where men are dominant in authority and control over women.
A feminist ideological approach is also very valuable in understanding the themes of Winter’s Bone due to the film’s denial of traditional, male-dominated industry film conventions. The film passes the Bechdell Test, as it follows primarily female protagonists in a struggle against a system that is unfair towards them for their sex. This can be seen in the cattle market sequence, where Ree stands out alone in a room dominated by only men, showing her to be isolated, an outsider in this macho community. The films also denies the Male Gaze, as Ree is not glamourised for the arbitrary viewing pleasures of male audience members, instead wearing dull, baggy clothing, with little makeup and a role as both mother and father, performing traditionally male tasks, like hunting in the squirrel gutting sequence and teaching the children to cook, like at the end of the opening sequence, when she shows them how to cook a deer stew.
A feminist ideological approach is also very valuable in understanding the film’s themes as it allows for the audience to understand the explicit representation of men being oppressive and tyrannical over women in this society, alongside the sharp sex divide and subsequent inequality this causes. This can be seen in the cattle market sequence, where the juxtaposition of shots of frightened cattle and a desperate Ree emphasises her entrapment in this harsh system, alongside her physical enclosure behind walkway railings, similar to the cattle in cages. As she shouts desperately for Milton’s attention, he neither hears nor sees her, representing the isolation of women in the society by the men, who are only concerned with their own positions of power over the women. A sharp increase in the non diegetic composed score increases the tension of the scene, heightening the audience’s panic, immersing us in Ree’s desperate position and, therefore, helping us understand her helplessness in this oppressive system. Therefore, a feminist ideological analysis to Winter’s Bone is very valuable in understanding it’s themes.
While a feminist ideological reading of Winter’s Bone is very valuable for understanding the implicit feminist messages and themes of the film, it would not be as effective in understanding the themes of No Country For Old Men, which would be better served by a deterministic ideological analysis. The film largely focuses on the significant role of pure chance and randomness in death, as seen in the coin toss sequence. In this scene, tension is built through interspersed rises in the non diegetic composed score, slowly dollying in on claustrophobic over-the-shoulder shots of the two men, and a drawn out silence in the sound mix add’s a strong sense of anxiety and suspense to the scene. However, despite the strong suggestions that the scene will end in a dramatic climax, the clerk simply calls the coin toss correctly and Anton leaves him alive. This abrupt and unsatisfying end to the scene means it made no impact on the plot. However, it serves to emphasise the importance of chance in death, showing that sometimes, even when death is expected, it may not come, as ultimately the process is random, represented here by the purely random decision of a coin toss. This theme is perpetuated by Anton’s representation as a grim reaper-like figure, with black clothing, an emotionless tone of voice, and uncanny, even inhuman characteristics, like finding enjoyment in the man’s fear, as seen in his knowing smile when he says “I can come back then”, implying he will kill the man in his sleep. The themes of death in this scene is also represented by the noose-like ropes hanging behind the clerk’s head, representing his brisk encounter with death, denied only by a random coin toss.
A deterministic ideological approach to No Country For Old Men is also very valuable in developing understanding of the film’s themes due to the large role that determinism plays in the ending sequence. As in the coin toss sequence, much time is spent throughout the film to raise tension, presumably buildings towards a final showdown between the protagonist, Moss, and the antagonist, Anton. However, Moss is killed offscreen while having idle conversation with a random woman, shot by people we do not know and left to die in an undignified way, bleeding in a mole doorway. This sudden emotionally unsatisfying and jarring ending to Moss’s journey serves to remind the audience of the way that death works, chance. It does not wait for events to reach a crescendo, and strikes suddenly, without warning, and leaving us confused. This can also be seen in the death of the poolside woman, who had no involvement in events, but became just another victim of random, careless violence. The sudden nature of the event is perpetuated by the first person perspective, shaky handheld camera movements putting us in Bell’s position during the shootout. Upon discovering Moss’s body, he is shocked, the unexpected event prompting him to retire from his career in dismay at and fear of the uncaring violence that permeates the film.
A deterministic ideological approach is very valuable in understanding the themes of No Country For Old Men also because of the way that random violence plays out in the final sequence of the film. In the final scene, alongside Moss’s sudden death, his widow, Carla Jean, is killed by Anton, who represents an emotionless death, as evidenced by Anton’s clear lack of sympathy for Jean, who has recently lost two loved ones and has done nothing to deserve death. In this scene, Anton himself is also nearly killed in a sudden car crash. Leading up to the crash, we see that he is following traffic codes by crossing a junction at a green light, causing him to presume that he is safe. However, the random nature of the crash, perpetuated by the fact that it does nothing to progress the plot, reinforces the theme of determinism. Similarly to the coin toss scene, death does not occur here, but the random near-death-experience shows that violence can still happen at random. The fact that Anton himself, the personification of death, is a victim of the randomness of violence reinforces the indiscriminate nature of death. Therefore, a deterministic ideological approach is very valuable in understanding the themes of No Country For Old Men.
A feminist ideological analysis of Winter’s Bone is very valuable to understanding the film’s themes due to the implicit imagery in the cattle market sequence displaying the helpless situation of women like Ree in an “anti-feminist world”, the denial of the male gaze, the exposure of the inequality between traditional gender roles and a strong protagonist who does not fit specifically into male or female societal roles. A deterministic ideological approach to No Country For Old Men is more valuable in understanding the film’s themes of the unpredictability and uncaring nature of death, as seen in the unforeseeable deaths of Moss and Carla Jean in the ending sequence, and the miraculous chance encounters with death of Anton and the gas station clerk in the ending and coin toss sequences. Therefore, a feminist approach to Winter’s Bone and a deterministic approach to No Country For Old Men are very valuable in understanding the themes of the film’s. However, using one of the two analyses on both films would not be very valuable, as the two hold very different messages, the former focusing on the perseverance of a strong female protagonist in a male-dominated society, the latter emphasising the random, cruel nature of death.
Multiple events in the closing sequence reinforce the primary crocus of the narrative, chance and it’s role in death. Firstly, Carla Jean, a woman who has had almost no role in the events of the film, is killed by Anton merely because he promised he would do so, presenting him, again, as an incarnation of death. However, he leaves her life up to the role of luck with a coin toss, saying that “This is the best I can do for you”, implying she at least has a chance of surviving this way. However, she guarantees her death by refusing to call the coin. Therefore, the only character in the film to not play Anton’s game of chance has a certain death as a result, proving that to deny death is to guarantee it.
Another way in which the role/importance of chance is reinforced is through Anton’s own near death experience in a random car crash. He follows the rules of the road, going past a green light, but is nearly killed by a sudden, jarring car crash. He survives, but is left seriously injured. Not only does the random crash signify the role of chance, but Anton surviving does too, showing that often events may be random and have no consequence, merely happening by pure chance or misfortune. In this way, it reflects the survival of the gas station clerk from earlier in the film. He survives by pure luck, and in the end, the seeming pointlessness of the scene serves to back up the role of chance in death.
Also, Bell’s conversation with his relative also evidences the role of chance. They speak about the relative being crippled by a man who recently died in prison, and Uncle Mac, who was suddenly shot down in his porch and died in the night after. The grim nature of the sequence of random, uncorrelated violence further perpetuates the vital role of chance in death, or even ones life, shown in how Bell’s relative still lives, despite his brisk encounter with death. His serving and the man who crippled him shows the randomness of death, alongside the pointlessness of the encounter. The man’s life has been ruined by a random event. Ceaseless, meaningless chaos. The very reason that Bell retires. Even Bell’s line (I’m older now than he ever was by twenty years.”, speaking on his father, shows that death does not wait on or is correlated to age. Hence the random and brutal deaths deaths of younger and aspiring men like Moss in the film.
The ideological approach of chance is backed up the by nature of Moss’s death. All the film, he has been built as a protagonist who will engage in a climatic shootout with the villain. He engages in idle conversation with a random woman during a bright day, a relatively pointless scene that feels safe for the audience. However, we then see the aftermath of a random shootout with Moss, with almost no buildup to it, from a relatively uninvolved characters perspective. Moss was killed, in an undignified way, offscreen by a group of characters we never knew. This reinforces the role of chance, alongside the uninvolved woman’s death by the pool, showing that death is uncaring of your role in events, and is so random that it may even come, abruptly and without warning, at the hands of something you were not expecting. This unnatural, unsatisfying ending for the audience confirms the films primary ideology of chance/its role in death, or life.
Bell’s lack of direct involvement with the main narrative in the film, and his role as one of the films few survivors and the one who contemplates the chaos once it is over, reflects his luck at surviving death merely by not being too closely involved in events.
This sequence serves to establish Anton’s behaviour as a harbinger of random death, brought about purely by chance. Anton does not wish to kill the gas station clerk, instead leaving his death up to the flip of a coin. In this way, he exemplifies the qualities of death. Uncaring of morals or warrant, but unstoppable and often random, unprovoked.
The ropes placed behind the clerk’s head signify death, alongside Anton’s appearance. He wears dark, simple clothing, with a bizarre haircut that almost emulates a cloak hood, painting him as a grim reaper like figure.
Tension is built throughout the scene through claustrophobic over the shoulder shot reverse shots between the men, which slowly dolly in after Anton’s threats are less veiled. A subtle, non diegetic composed score players at a small interval builds a steering tension in the atmosphere, alongside the more abundant use of silence which raises the suspense towards what we expect to be a climax. However, the lack of one further cements the ideological approach of chance and luck, as the man lives, against our expectations (established by the tension built throughout the scene), showing that death is random, and so may not occur even when expected. Therefore, the outcome of this scene, where a person who did not warrant death survives through sheer luck of the coin landing heads, contrasts later scenes in the film where characters die or are injured by random events, like car crashes, or abrupt shootouts.
Important quotes:
“You stand to win everything, call it.” This line means that if the man calls the coin correctly, he simply gets to continue living, perpetuating the role of chance in death, which may often not happen despite our expectations, and a near death experience, much like this scene, can feel pointless or inconsequential.
“You’ve been putting it up your whole life, you just didn’t know it.” Here, Anton virtually tells the man that all his life he has been travelling toward death. Despite this seemingly backing up a fatalist ideological approach to the film, the coin toss makes the final decision, and its random approval of the mans right to continue living counteracts this quote by Anton that death by his hands is the man’s fate.
Looking at the film from an ideological approach of chance and the role of randomness in death, we can see the first allusion to this mentioned in the narration by Ed Tom Bell. He speaks about the chaotic nature of crime nowadays, speaking about the murder of a 14 year old girl. While the murderer was believed to have done it as a crime of passion, the brutality of the story is the first sign that Bell feels lost and “overmatched” by the chaotic and unprejudiced violence in the world. This same violence can be seen in the brutal, uncaring killings that Anton Chigurh commits in the next few minutes. He seems to exhibit no emotion as he murders two innocent people simply because they are an obstacle to him, showing him to serve as a sort of embodiment of the cruel and uncaring nature of death. These two people did not deserve or provoke it. They simply died due to being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Lywelyn Moss is established as an experienced, careful and methodical character through the slow paced, patient hunting sequence. He does not rush into the drug deal gone wrong, instead he carefully and methodically surveys the scene and investigates what happened. His monologue to himself, “but if you stopped, you stopped in chase.”, confirms that he is calm, intelligent, and composed. He even waits a long time before approaching the body of the last man standing, and while looking into the bag of money, contemplates to himself for a short time before leaving with the money.
A reading of No Country Old Men would benefit from an ideological approach of chance, as the film contains many underlying themes that require an active spectatorship to realise. The film focuses much on the role of chance in the fates of its characters, many of whom die or survive by sheer luck. Nothing is predetermined, many left up to random chance, seen in the use of the coin toss. Feminism would not be a good approach to take for this film, as there are few female protagonists, and the film does not pay much attention to gender roles, like Winter’s Bone.
For Winter’s Bone, a feminist ideological approach is valuable as the film strongly implies that to be the core of its message. The film follows female characters in a male-dominated community, and throughout the film overrides the patriarchal society through female characters taking initiative and control for themselves. An ideological approach of chance would not suit this film, as it does not focus on randomness or luck, etc.
Merab is threatening, and shows no sign of fear with a rifle aimed at her, showing that she is used to violence. Ree, also, is bloodied, aggressive and quick to anger.
The Sheriff at the end of the scene looks disgusted by the sight of the hands, whereas Ree has no visible reaction to it, having, seemingly, overcome her grief. The man is the coward here., the one displaying hysteria.
Ideology:
In summary, the film is about a woman struggling against problems forced on her by a patriarchal society, and in the end survives by her own resilience, independence, and help from a group of women. The men in the film either represent the threats she faces, such as the bale bondsman or the Sheriff, or the toor of her problems, like Thump Milton and Jessop, or are entirely useless to her, again like Milton or Jessop.
The story is not resolved through a violent climax, as it would typically be in male-dominated Hollywood. Instead, the resolution contains only female characters, and overtly avoids a showdown or a fight. Therefore, the film is atypical, following women from a woman’s POV, made by women, resolved in a rare way. This choice to go against violence is seen in Ree choosing to leave her gun behind, on trust, putting herself at risk to protect her family. In contrast, Teardrop, at the end of the sequence, implies to Ree that he is going to kill Jessop’s murderer. Due to a sense of toxic masculinity and a belief that he is bound through some sort of flawed, invisible code of loyalty or honour, he puts himself at risk not to protect the family, but to enact petty revenge, only exacerbating the cycle of violence. Ree was only ever involved in this situation out of necessity, wherea Teardrop had no actual need to take revenge. It is his choice, and he, weakly, decides to pursue violence, rather than protecting his family, like Ree did. Ree even chooses to stay home and help the kids rather than following g her dream and joining the army, sacrificing her own life for theirs.
Often in film women are objectified. Here, the opposite happens, as Jessop serves only as a corpse, an object. And in the end, a woman saves the day. Ree commits to a horrific task of removing her fathers hands, all to protect her family, despite the obvious trauma it causes her. Alongside this, in her final conversation with the Sheriff, Ree holds the leverage, not the man, as he pleads with her not to expose him as a coward. She knows this, mocking him, and leaves knowing that she has the power over the man, not the other way around, for once.
In the final scene, Ree, her mother and the daughter do the laundry, whereas the boy, Sonny, just plays idly on a nearby skateboard. The chicks that Teardop gives to the kids as a gift represent the children taking on their own parental responsibilities.
The scene is shot entirely differently to the rest of it, done in black and white and in a smaller 4 by 3 aspect ratio, with a grainy, vintage video quality that evokes the aesthetic of a documentary or home video. This creates a surrealistic, intimate feel to the scene. The scene feels real, yet surreal and metaphoric.
The camera movements in the scene are disorienting, moving randomly and shaking. A worms eye view and an arch shot around a tree trunk put us in the squirrels POV, evoking the sense of panic and rushing momentum of the scene, also helping us understand the fear that the squirrel has.
Ominous imagery like burning woods and a canted angle shot of vultures disregarding their carrion create a gloomy atmosphere and imply that danger is encroaching on Ree’s life at a rapid pace, and that she cannot do anything about it. This is also seen in the shot of the squirrel clinging onto its tree, it’s gone, protectively, played before a wide shot shows the woods burning up, conveying a sense of finality and doom.
Sound –
A loud, imposing and disorienting diegetic sound of chainsaws dominates the sound mix, putting the viewer on edge, as it does the squirrel. It evokes a feeling of impending doom, emphasises by the images of fire and the frantic squirrel, as if the animal, representing Ree, is being closed in on by threatening forces. The sound also emulates the wood cutter that Ree was using earlier in the film, a device typically used by men. Therefore, the sound of it used here can be interpreted to mean the approach of men, cutting down the woods, which here represent Ree’s home and lands.
A non diegetic composed score dominates the sound mix. It is overbearing, discordant and imposing on the audience, building tension and a sense of chaos in the scene, alongside a sense of impending doom. This sense is also created when the sound of chainsaws is louder the second time it plays. This same chainsaw sound also foreshadows Ree’s later task of sawing off her father’s dead hands. The entire scene, in fact, implies that Ree will have to make drastic decisions to save herself from a cruel, tragic fate.
Editing –
Mise-En-Scen –
Performance –
We understand the imposing sound of chainsaws to be intimidating the squirrel due to it’s frantic, panicked and darting movements. It looks around as if searching for a threat, and runs as if trying to avoid one.
Ideology:
The squirrel in the dream represents Ree, with smaller squirrels dependent on it, as it panics and tries to avoid an imposing, unstoppable approaching force that traps and encloses her, helpless. The whole scene evokes her slipping control over her circumstances as she nears losing her home.
In conclusion, this sequence presents Ree as trapped in by a cruel system and an even crueler fate that she is almost hopeless to survive, which approaches her, her home, and her family at a rapid pace.
Ree stands behind bars, which the camera looks through to show her or the men in the seats. This presents her as physically segregated from the men, who are above her, and do not notice her. This is reinforced when she walks along the walkway above the cattle cages. She is shown, in a wide shot, to be physically trapped in and removed from the men, also shown through the juxtaposition to the caged in cattle below her. However, she is shown to rebel against this entrapment, shouting and running, facing the opposite direction that the cows do. A close up of a screaming calf at the end of the scene represents Ree’s struggle, her panic and helplessness, and her slipping control over the situation.
The cattle cage environment is shown through a cold, blue and silver colours palette, and the dark area below the walkway seems large and imposing, as if it were stretching on forever. Close ups of cattle throughout the sequence build a sinister tone, and build contrast between Ree and them, both of whom are trapped, scared, out of control and relying on their fates to be decided by men above them.
Sound –
A loud, non-diegetic composed sound rises in the sound mix throughout the scene, disorienting the audience and giving the scene a dramatic tension, alongside a sinister, ominous undertone. The blaring, distorted, unintelligible voice of the auctioneer over speaker remains present in the background, evoking the sense of this being a masculine, “anti-feminist world”.
Editing –
Mise-En-Scen –
The men in this scene are all made to look like a singular mass, each one indistinguishable from the other, wearing similar clothing, typically with facial hair, white, middle aged.
Performance –
Ideology:
The auction is completely male-dominated space, where some stand physically higher than the rest of the room, and all the men sit above Ree, most not even noticing her. This makes Ree look physically smaller in this space. Close ups show that the men all look the same, an anonymous mass of masculinity. Ree is out of place here, seen in how she is below the men, behind bars, and when she walks in she does so beside a dog, who also looks out of place here.
Ree is also shown to be out ignored and separated from the men when she shouts down at Thump Milton, who physically cannot see or hear her. She does not have a voice, but she continues to shout and give chase to Milton, defiant against her segregated and enclosed space in society.
The woods stretching into the background of the shot of Ree and her siblings look monotonous, grey and dead, evoking a quiet, still, empty environment.
Ree is shown in the shot to be the one in charge, centrally framed, surrounded by her shorter siblings, with the prominent rifle aimed.
The camera focuses on the gutting of the squirrel, displaying the gruesome nature of this lesson the kids have to learn.
When Ree is cutting wood, she is shown in a wide shot, showing that she feels trapped in her environment, reflecting her struggle with poverty, surviving, and finding Jessop. This shot also allows for us to see the large mound of discarded tyres littering the foreground, further establishing the poverty of the community, alongside the large, imposing barn that Ree stands in, which is made crudely out of wooden planks. Tight over the shoulder shots during her conversation with Teardrop increases the tension and uncomfortable nature of the moment.
Sound –
The choice of only using diegetic sounds in the sequence create a sense of realism, and evoke a silent, dead atmosphere, also giving the film a more serious tone.
Editing –
Mise-En-Scen –
An example of Ree being presented in a way that denies the male gaze by being naturalistic and unappealing is through her chapped lips. Teardrop is also presented in a realistic way, presented as a man who is clearly living in depravity and addicted to a harmful drug. He looks menacing, and this is also shown through Ree’s clear discomfort around him.
Performance –
The characters act in a naturalistic way, seen in how Ree tells her brother “bless you” after he sneezes. This presents her as caring, polite and a realistic person. Her behaviours and mannerisms are naturalistic. She is also shown to be a strong, if harsh mother figure, sternly telling her brother to get used to gutting the animal. She takes on the attitude of a stern mother while doing a typically male job, acting as a parental/teacher figure. She is also clearly knowledgeable on the subject of hunting, showing her experience and her comfort ability/skill in these traditionally male roles.
When Ree receives news of Jessop’s burned car, she gives no apparent emotional reaction, presenting her as mature, composed and strong. It also shows how disconnected her father is from her family. Teardrop is patronising to Ree, calling her “little girl” and trying to intimidate her by grabbing her face after she confidently tells him that she wont sell her land. She does not seem afraid though, meeting his gaze and refusing to shy away. In this way, she is presented as being above Teardrop morally, physically healthier than him. He blinks slowly and speaks in a way that makes him sound slow or inhibited or tired. She speaks with confident clarity, while he has to rely on intimidation to sway Ree. This subtle power dynamic is also seen in how she is clearly disapproving of hid cocaine usage, which she literally turns her nose at. This shows that she recognises her responsibilities as a parent figure and role mode. She also confidently and sarcastically tells Teardrop “not so far”, when he asks if she is addicted to it herself yet. Despitre all this, Teardrops aid through money, advice on how to financially support herself, his enquiry about Ree’s mother, all suggest that he does care about her and the family’s welfare.
Ideology:
Ree is further shown to be the one with responsibility, caring for the family by hunting, a traditionally male role. However, she also cares for the children, teaching them to fend for themselves, a maternal role. This role as mother and father at once is seen in her life lesson of “never ask for what ought to be offered” to her brother, and, in contrast, her teaching them to hunt animals for food. By acting as a maternal and paternal figure, she is presented as un-gendered /in a way that is not particularly one gender or another. Rather, she is an individual, not a stereotype. In this way, the film denies the male gaze. Ree is also shown to fill masculine roles by her cutting wood with a wood splitter in the next scene.
The young girl seems to be taking most roles, as she pulls the guns trigger, and intently watches the gutting, showing her concentration and eagerness to learn. She shows no signs of disgust at the gutting, and does not shy away from the corpse. In contrast, her brother seems upset by the sight, and is clearly bored while waiting for a squirrel to appear. In this way, the female character actually takes on more responsibility than the male one. She represents the next generation of women who will take up traditionally male roles.
Ree fills all teacher/parental roles in the film, presenting her as neither feminine or masculine, but independent and strong, selfless and confident.
We are introduced to Ree, her family, and her daily life in the rural Ozark’s. We see that she is struggling financially, having to rely on her neighbours for food and giving away her horse as she cannot afford hay. We also learn from a tense interaction with the local Sheriff that her father, Jessie, has been released from prison, but since he is not appearing for court, the house and lands that Ree lives in are at risk of repossession as they are up for her fathers bond. She commits to finding him before she loses everything.
Key elements:
Cinematography –
The rural environment is shown through a cool, silvery blue colour palette which evokes a cold temperature and still, dead atmosphere. The inside of the home is a contrasting warm, dimly lit, orange palette that evokes a feeling of warmth and homeliness, emphasised by the intimate moments that Ree shares with her family, such as when she looks after her mother and her brother shows them the stray dog he found.
The family is shown to be struggling with poverty and are trapped in it by the way that the kids are shown through a frame within a frame between railing bars near the start of the scene as they play with kittens.
Ree is shown to be isolated when she looks through a window to her siblings in class, and when she looks in on the military trainees, she watches through a physical, translucent barrier, showing that she is held back from joining. She is isolated from adults, people her age, and younger people. Also, the brightly lit hall where people train evokes her ambition and desire to join herself. She is also shown to be trapped by the wide shots eh is shown in, such as when she walks away from Sonya after giving her horse away, simulating her feeling of being trapped by her poverty.
Sound –
The non-diegetic composed score accompanying the establishing shot of the rural environment immediately establish the Missouri Ozark’s as the setting of the film. The song is somber and melancholic, accompanied only by the diegetic sounds of the children playing, lending the film a quiet, dull atmosphere.
The moment that a non-diegetic droning increases in the sound mix rises to add tension to the scene where Sonya questions Ree on where Jessop. It is made more tense by the relative silence that has building up to it.
Editing –
The slow pace and relative silence of the opening scene establishes the loneliness and bleak situation that Ree is in.
Mise-en-scen –
They environment of the Ozark’s is immediately presented as empty and hollow, with dead grass, dark trees, grey skies and sparse, wooden homes surrounded by litter.
The poverty that Ree and her family live in is established through the grim looking food, cluttered and cramped house, messy garden filled with disregarded kids toys, tyres and farming equipment, and the gone-off food the starved and cold looking dog has to eat. The children have no beds, instead sleeping on the chairs and sofa. In contrast, the school seems bright, clean and warm.
The clothing of all the characters in the film is gender-neutral, in that it does not present any characters as more feminine or masculine. This is true for Ree, whose clothing is baggy, with muted colours, and looks as dull as the Ozark’s she lives in.
Ree looks much younger than the older characters in the film, such as Sonya, which, in turn, presents them as more experienced and weathered. Also, by presenting the women as similar to the men in their clothing, or by having older female characters, the movie denies the male gaze.
The sheriff is presented as an outsider by his clean, shiny car and presentable uniform . It shows that he is not like the locals, and conveys Ree’s discomfort near him and subsequent distrust and coldness towards him.
Performance –
The children are shown as innocent and happy, unlike Ree, who clearly takes on the hardships of being a young carer, and so seems relatively hapless.
Ideology:
The films ideology is explicit in that it follows mostly women, the story being told through a female perspective (a female who revolts against conventional female roles in a patriarchal society), and features a strong, self-reliant woman as the protagonist. Much of the audience’s satisfaction also comes from seeing this character overcome the challenges she faces, many a result of the rural, patriarchal community she lives in. However, it is also implicit in that this theme is built up throughout the film as an underlying idea, the main focus of the film’s narrative being the hunt for Ree’s missing father, her growth as a strong female character a large, accompanying aspect of the story.
“A feminist film about an anti-feminist world”.
This quote is backed up every time that a female character goes against a clear gender stereotype or role in the rural society of the film.
Ree is immediately established as the protector of the family, serving as what would traditionally be ‘the man of the house’ in most rural, isolated country communities such as this one. From her first appearance, she looks tired as she hangs up clothes as the children play around her, literally looking up to her. Ree also stands above her mother, showing her responsibility as the carer of the home and the family, without any present or able minded adults. She is established as an independent self-reliant woman by her teaching the children and caring for her mother. We also see her taking the maternal role by teaching the kids lessons and giving them roles, the girl takes on the job of feeding the god and the kittens, the boy looks after a dog he found in the woods, Ree teaches the girl maths and spelling, the boy manners, and both of them how to cook. We also see her looking in on the kids in class, with a hint of pride on her face, presenting her even more as a mother figure.
Ree is presented in a way that denies the ‘male gaze’ theory, wearing baggy and dull clothing, shown in dim or overcast light, surrounded by an unclean home and being seen washing her face in a sink, a realistic but unattractive moment. She is not glamorised by makeup or eye-catching clothing. She is presented as a real person, who is not sexual or treated as a sex object to any extent, rather the opposite.
At school, Ree seems to be avoiding the child-care training room, where women are clearly being indoctrinated into the patriarchal role of being the carer of the house and children. However, there is a man in there being trained to hold a baby, which is a reversal of traditional gender roles in the rural community. This is also seen in the emphasis placed on the women training to join the military. She is not just forced to be a strong individual, but seems to want to be stronger, striving to join the military. This is also evidenced by her seemingly being embarrassed to ask for help from Sonya when she gives her horse to her and her teaching her brother to “never ask for what ought to be offered”.
Ree’s neighbour, Sonya, looks after the horses, a traditionally male dominated farming role. She is also later seen carving up game with her husband, rather than just him doing it. At the same time, though, her husband warningly approaches the sheriff as if protecting his local community, taking on the traditional, protective male role.
The sheriff is clearly hated by this small community, seen in how cold Ree is toward him. Ree takes on the mothers role again here, telling the sheriff “you better just tell me” after he fails to talk to her, symbolising Ree’s assumed responsibility as the mother, and the hardships that involves. She is resolute in her task to find Jessop, interrupting the sheriff and telling him, confidently, that she will find him.
When Sonya enters the home, she addressed Ree first, then the kids, then Ree’s mother, showing the authority and dynamic of who shares most of the responsibility in the home.She also stands up for herself when Sonya accuses her of knowing where Jessop is. The ending of the scene exemplifies Ree’s sacrifice of her comfort to look after her family, seen when she lets out her anxiety at Sonya’s accusations in a huff, then, before having time to relax, turns and begins teaching the kids to cook deer stew.
The film technically does not pass the Bechdell test, as while there are multiple names female characters, their main source of discussion, motivating factor and the thing that drives the plot forward is Jessop’s disappearance, a male character (although, when Sonya and Ree first speak, it is about a horse, so…you be the judge of this!). However, it denies the male gaze, displaying realistic female characters through the perspective of a woman who goes against traditional, patriarchal roles in society.
Ree’s appearance is realistic, the film one of social realism, presented as a person who is not sexual or sexually suggestive in any way.
Feminism is an ideology that advocates women’s rights and equality between the sexes, such as equal pay for women, rather than women earning less than men.
Feminist Film:
Feminist film is film that holds a feminist ideology, made by a feminist director, that push feminist ideals to the audience, who may have a preferred, aberrant, etc. reading of the film. These films will focus on women, typically having female protagonists, their roles, place in contemporary society and the society itself. It may present men as antagonists or obstacles, and may present women as victims of the society.
The Bechdell Test:
The Bechdell Test, created by Alison Bechdel, is a test that determines the representation of women in film. It determines this by a checklist; does the film have two women talking about something other than a man? It can also be determined by if the film even contains two named women. The test indicates the active presence of women in fiction in general, rather than a specific piece, calling attention to a lack of equal gender equality in fiction. It is evidenced that films that pass the test gross more on average than films which do not.
The Male Gaze:
The male gaze, initially coined as a concept to analyse the representation of women as objects rather than people in advertising and media, is the act of presenting women in fiction from a masculine perspective, presenting them as sexual objects for male viewers to desire. It has three perspectives: the man behind the camera, the male characters within the film, the male viewer.
The film is based of the 2005 novel of the same name by Cormac McCarthy which centres around the violence associated with the drug trade at the border between the U.S and Mexico. The film strays from the book in a few regards, choosing to keep the plot somewhat unresolved at the end, for example, not explaining what happened to the drug money. It does share some qualities though, such as the persistence of Anton, who eventually escapes, leaving Bell contemplating his place in the modern world.
The directors, Joel and Ethan Coen, are known for producing darkly comedic, rural crime thrillers. In the film, they utilise minimal sound design and editing to raise tension through the simplicity of how the scenes are presented to us, allowing the audience to become immersed in the atmosphere and enthralled by the slow buildup, which the Brothers take their time with establishing, before a short but explosive, bloody climax. Roger Deakins, the cinematographer, is recognisable for his use for dark lighting, characterised by strong shadows and sharp contrast tween light and dark, to raise suspense and tension through the films visuals.
As a pair of auteur directors, the brothers have much creative control (Roderick Jaynes edited No Country For Old Men, a fictional name made up as a disguise for the films actual editors, Joel and Ethan Coen), there are reoccurring motifs throughout their filmography. Their films often take place in rural Southern American, dry, expansive landscapes where morally grey characters driven typically by money are hunted by psychopathic hitmen, involving surreal dream sequences and shocking climaxes, and also use reoccurring actors like Frances McDormand and John Goodman. Their films are almost always crime-centred, following immoral characters with dry senses of humour that results in the films often holding qualities of dark comedies. No Country For Old Men makes few attempts to be funny.
They have won many awards, No Country For Old Men winning four like best adapted screenplay and best director, three BAFTA awards and two Golden Globe wins, so fifteen wins overall, with 101 nominations overall (for all of the previously mentioned awards). Their films tend to turn profits, e.g The Big Lebowski had a budget of $15 million and made $46.7 million, No Country For Old Men had $25 million and made $171.6 million, O’ Brother Where Art Thou had $26 million and made $72 million.
No Country For Old Men (Jone Coen, Ethan Coen, 2007) follows Llewelyn Moss, a man who is out hunting one day when he stumbles upon a drug deal gone arry, and comes home with a satchel with $2 million in it. He is pursued by Anton Chigurgh, a sociopathic hitman who ruthlessly always every person who he encounters on the road to finding Moss, often leaving their fate to the decision of a coin toss. Finally, Sheriff Ed Tom Bell follows the chaotic trail of the crimes and tries to save Moss from his own ambition, contemplating the nature of the modern world and the ceaseless violence that permeates within it.
The film utilises moments of long, drawn out silence to build tension, alongside hard lighting to raise suspense and terror within the audience. It is brutal, using strong violence to convey the cruel nature of the world and the character Anton’s ideology. It ends nightly unconventionally, killing off the protagonist offscreen by an unknown group of people before the final showdown that the film has been building up to. It gives out with a whimper, not a bang, the antagonist getting away and the constantly tense film ending with a somber monologue from a character who remained on the sidelines throughout most of the film. This goes against everything that the film has been building up to, shocking the audience and stopping the films placing dead in its tracks. Despite the films violence, it also involves highly profound themes of ambition, evil, despair and human cruelty. This is exemplified through Anton, who, despite being an inhuman killer, has his won set of rules and even morales, often refraining from killing someone whom you expected him to, or killing someone’s for no reason other than he made a promise to do so.
I loved this film. It was gripping from start to (almost) finish, with a thought provoking story and some extremely memorable sequences. I rate No Country For Old Men ★★★★★!
Debra Granik uses the desolate environment of the rural Ozarks and silence in the film to create an atmosphere of horror that permeates through the film’s adventure/thriller plot line. The use of sound design is minimalist, choosing often to not include the composed score by Dickon Hinchliffe, but when it is used it is done so to build tension between characters in a subtle way. For example, in the opening scene a gentle folk song plays, but we cannot hears any diegetic sounds in the scene except fro the creaking of a trampoline. This creates an eerie atmosphere and establishes Ree’s situation as a dark, unusual one. It establishes the protagonist as someone who has never had a childhood. Tension is also created when the Sheriff visits by using on;y the diegetic sounds of his footsteps and the clanging of distant bells. Low groaning sounds are used at time to convey Ree’s rising fear as events in her life take a turn, giving a depth to these moments. At other times, a prominent beating of a drum in the non-diegetic sound mix adds tension to the scene, such as when Teardrop destroys a car’s front window.
The cinematographer, Michael McDonough, elevates the sense of fear through a similarly minimal use of colour and a bleak production design. This can be seen in her time at school or the army recruitment office, where the colours surrounding her are more vibrant and eye-catching, in contrast to the lifeless, grey and bland colour pallet used throughout the rest of the film as Ree’s situation becomes more bleak and hopeless, which is conveyed through the similarly dull cinematography. This reaches a crescendo when the final, and most brutal scene of the film, takes place at night, only lit by moonlight. Granik creates villains in the story by presenting people like Teardrop with intense shadows across their faces combined with soft light to illuminate his weary features and gruff face. The camera movements are also calm, steady, and create a feeling in the audience that we are an observer to what is happening, which makes it more emotionally distressing as we see Ree go through these terrible situations. For example, when she is beaten unconscious and wakes up later, the slow, steady camera movements feel realistic, allowing the audience to become immersed in the tension of the scene.
The Ozark’s in Winter serve as a pathetic fallacy, emulating Ree’s deepening loss of control and safety. It also lends a chilled, bitter atmosphere to the film. It is made to be cold and isolated in its environment and the way the characters interact with each other, the Hillbilly stereotype played here with malicious connotations, showing sexism in the community and a quiet, secretive group of antagonists. Ree herself is isolated from them by acting as a strong female lead despite the way the females around her treat her or are treated by their husbands. The grim atmosphere and bleak prospects that Ree faces is also shown through the rural poverty, methamphetamine addiction, gang violence, domestic violence, metal illness and murder that exists within the community she lives in.
As additional contextual information , the film is based off the book of the same name, brought Jennifer Lawrence to wider notoriety amongst audiences, made $6 million at the U.S Box Office becoming an indie film success.
Winter’s Bone (Debra Granik, 2010) follows Ree (Jennifer Lawrence) who searches for her missing, drug making father who has put their house u for his bond and is not appearing at court. If she is to save her family from the bitter cold of the winter, she needs to find her father, dead or alive.
This is an independent American film, with a feminist ideology that resides in the undertone of the script, as the films takes place in a setting where the men often abuse their wives, who hold traditional roles in society. I liked many sequences, particularly Teardrop’s confrontation with the Sheriff, due to the tension of the moment and the subtext of the dialogue. I also liked the ending, which was suitably shocking for the buildup of the rest of the film. While there were only 2 characters that the audience can attach to, that and the general chilly atmosphere lent the film a cruel, isolated, hopeless tone.
For this component, we will be looking at a U.S mainstream film, No Country For Old Men (Coen Brothers, 2007) and an independent film, Winter’s Bone (Debra Granik, 2010). The specialist study areas are ideology and spectatorship. Past exam questions suggest that these will be asked in relation to core study areas such as sound, etc.
“Compare how far your chosen films reflect their different production contexts.”
Planning:
Introduction – Overview of how Casablanca was influenced by the context of the ‘Golden Age of Hollywood’ and the studio system it was produced in, and the same for Bonnie and Clyde and the ‘New Hollywood’ alongside the French New Wave and the 1960s as a whole.
Talk about ‘Ricks introductory Sequence”, particularly focusing on the cinematography and sound design, editing and representation. Talk about how this is a result of the Studio System and Classical Style and WW2 contexts. For Bonnie and Clyde, talk about how the opening sequence differs from the Classical Hollywood Style in its jarring close ups with lack of establishing shots, but compare in the way that the lead stars are presented. Make sure to compare each element of each film, i.e cinematography or performance, to examples of the same element from the chosen sequence of the other film.
Comment on how the ‘Leaving Rick’s’ sequence is shot, how the characters/actors are represented, and how the editing and sound design are incorporated to create a seamless feel to it. Then, compare this to the ‘Meeting Family’ sequence, focusing on this scenes blatant differences to Classical Hollywood and similarities to the French New Wave.
Conclusion – Focus in on how the objectives of the directors changed between the times that both films were made. Consider that in the 1940s, it was about sleekness and seamlessness, keeping attention on the story and the actors, whereas in the 1960s filmmakers inspired by the French New Wave wanted to defy conventions and produce casual, low budget films.
Version 1:
Casablanca and Bonnie and Clyde reflect the social, cultural and institutional contexts they were made in to a large extent. The former was made in a time period where focus was placed on the story, helped to be communicated through seamless editing and smooth, unnoticeable cinematography, the latter inspired by foreign film movements that placed emphasis on going against convention and utilising casual, cheap film production.
Casablanca was made during the ‘Golden Age of Hollywood’ where the Classical Hollywood Style, a method of filmmaking that focused on remaining unnoticed to the audience and entirely serving to communicate the story, was dominant. This can be seen in the camerawork of ‘Rick’s introductory sequence’, which begins with a typical long shot to establish the location for the audience, then cutting to a close up of the cafe’s sign to bring their attention to the specific location of the scene. The camera then smoothly tilts down and follows behind a group of customers entering the cafe, a moment in which the gliding movement done with only two cuts so far is used to immerse the audience in the environment, further done by the doorman holding the door for the camera and a waiter acknowledging it. On the contrary, Bonnie and Clyde was made after the collapse of the Hollywood studio system, after which theatres, no longer directly owned by the production companies, had the freedom to show new, foreign films. This led to a rise in filmmakers inspired by the French New Wave, such as Arthur Penn and Warren Beatty, who incorporated the style of filmmaking from the New Wave, which emphasised a casual approach to making the film, often being self-aware and provocative. This can be seen in the opening sequence of the film, which immediately begins with an extreme close up of Bonnie’s lips, without the preamble of an establishing shot, jarring the audience. This opening shot also immediately sexualises her, alongside the later use of sexual imagery done through the coke bottles and Clyde’s gun, which is felt suggestively by Bonnie. This reflects the increasing acceptance of sexual imagery in America in the 1960s, which Bonnie and Clyde includes often, therefore bypassing the Hays Code, which Casablanca adhered to by avoiding violence or sexual imagery. The rest of the opening scene in Bonnie’s bedroom plays through tight close ups of her face, obstructing the room from view and emulating her feeling of being trapped and constrained, deliberately avoiding the classical convention of establishing where the scene takes place. Therefore, both films reflect their production contexts, through their approach to conveying information to the audience, to a large extent.
The sound design in Casablanca in ‘Rick’s introductory’ sequence is smooth and unnoticeable to the audience, the composed diegetic sounds of Sam playing and people talking growing in the mix as the camera nears him and those crowded around him. This, alongside the constant background ambience of conversations in the cafe and the way these subtly subside in the sound mix when the audiences attention is being focused on dialogue, serve to immerse the audience in the film and keep their attention on the story and the setting it takes place in. The films also cuts, in Classical Hollywood Style, as little as possible, utilising smooth, subtle camera movements and carefully choreographed actors to show what is of importance in frame, such as two people talking, and only cuts to bring us deeper into the cafe, keeping the audiences attention away from the technical aspects of how the film is made. Bonnie and Clyde, in it’s opening sequence, has an undertone of faultiness in how it was made, as when Bonnie first speaks, the diegetic dialogue is loud and jarring. In contrast, when they speak outside, the dialogue sounds distant and muffled, hard to make out. This prevents the audience from becoming completely immersed in the dialogue of the story. The films also goes against Classical Hollywood convention of showing the action by avoiding showing Clyde commit the robbery, remaining outside as he goes in with a gun. This purposefully denies the audience the pleasure of seeing the action, inspired by the French New Wave style of focusing on the characters and their personal journey rather than just the crimes they commit, although the consequences of their actions and the violence they commit do play a key role in the film. Therefore, both films reflect their production contexts to a large extent through their approaches to cinematography and sound design.
The influence that the Hollywood Star System had on Casablanca can be seen in the ‘Leaving Rick’s’ sequence. Here, the cinematographer ensures that Ingrid Bergman, a popular star that Warner Bros. Had a contract with, looks as glamorous and beautiful as possible. She is presented is close ups, such as when she talks to Rick, by herself, to keep the audiences attention on her, in which the side of her face she preferred is shown, catch lights in her eye give them a lively sparkle, and the careful composition of the light on her face presents her as elegant, fragile and flawless, if unrealistic, in her appearance. Bonnie and Clyde strives for a more naturalistic beauty in the opening sequence, where Faye Dunaway in shown simply with makeup to present her as a more relatable and real, though still a renowned film star, protagonist for the audience to follow, as in the French New Wave style of real, typically working-class protagonists fighting against the establishment. In Casablanca, Humphrey Bogart is introduced to the scene in a low-angle shot, presenting him as a physically larger character, framed by an overhead arch, centre frame, to keep the audiences attention on him. Bonnie and Clyde simply shows Clyde from above, without a close up or carefully composed frame to signify his importance. He is also portrayed as a flawed protagonist in the film, evidenced by his limp from losing a toe in prison as he approaches the store to rob it. On the contrast, Rick seems constantly in control of the situation, carrying an air of causal calm about him at all times. This shows that both films reflect the contexts in which they were made to large extents, through their approach to representing the actors and focusing the audiences attention on them.
In Casablanca’s Leaving Rick’s sequence, the camera carefully rises and falls when the actors do, such as when Lazlo sits and it pedestals down to track him. Actors are carefully choreographed to keep our attention on certain significant things in frame, such as when Renault turns and calls for a waiter, revealing one, distant and unimportant in the background, but still there for the audience to see who he is speaking to. This smooth and seamless camerawork allows for the scene to continue on for some time before cutting to get closer to the characters, keeping the audiences attention on their conversation rather than the editing. Bonnie and Clyde, on the other hand, uses distracting editing in its ‘meeting family sequence’, such as the sudden and inconsistent slow motion shots when the kids roll down a hill, then having reached the bottom by the start of the next shot, and the non-temporal cut from one shot of Bonnie throwing sand to her hugging her mother in the next. These unusual and non traditional approaches to editing are disorienting for the audience, also done through the strange, hazy filter the scene is shot through, giving it a dream-like, surreal quality. This scene also features many sudden moments of eerie silence, such as when it cuts to Moss stood on the hill, which makes the scene feel imperfect in its production. Another way the films reflect their production contexts is in the approach to shooting on sets or location. Casablanca was made during the Hollywood Studio System, where the big eight film studios owned sets which they would display in films through shooting on superficial locations created through lavish set design. This is evident in Casablanca, as Rick’s expansive, lively, exotic and bustling cafe is designed meticulously in such a way to allow the camera to move through it, conveying the story and the expensive, detailed set. Bonnie and Clyde, in the style of the French New Wave style of filmmaking, favours a naturalistic approach, and shoots on location, evident in how the background of the picnic area is a decaying, abandoned industrial site, reflecting the backdrop of poverty during the Depression Era, but shot in rural Mid-West America, where some areas were still recovering financially from that period. Therefore, through their approach to editing and shooting on locations, these films reflect their production contexts to a large extent.
Both films reflect the production contexts that they were made in to large extents. In Casablanca, it is clear through the smooth cinematography and sound design, lack of editing, high emphasis on the stars, and shooting on superficial, constructed reality sets, that it was largely a product of the Classical Hollywood Era, which sought to keep focus on the story and the stars. Bonnie and Clyde was heavily influenced by the French New Wave and the rising acceptance of sexuality in the 1960s, which is seen through the films flawed, distracting editing, jarring and disorienting cinematography, unfitting sound design and naturalistic approach to presenting its stars and shooting on real locations, where they adapted to the environment to film.
Bonnie & Clyde is a product of the inspiration that Arthur Penn, Warren Beatty and Dede Allen took from the French New Wave style of filmmaking. This took a causal, freelance approach to filmmaking with no strings attached by conventional means of editing, cinematography, acting, dialogue and narrative. As a result, the film is edited in a way that brings our attention to the editing, as often the film will cut to the same image further on in time, and other times characters are further on in time after a cut, delineating, to an extent, from typical continuity editing. It also takes a new approach to camera work, often using handheld cameras and shaky camera work. The actors are unconvincing, and the dialogue is often written in a way that sounds unconvincing and undramatic.
Warren Beatty, the actor of Clyde and the films producer, had a large hand in the films final product. He chose the actors, the director, oversaw the script and wheeled the film into production in the first place. He took ideas from the French New Wave, and oversaw the film to ensure that it would contain imperfections. He also wanted to play Clyde as a morally grey character who killed, robbed, and suffered from impotency, going against the typical convention of a basically flawless, handsome, dashing male movie protagonist. He and Penn wanted the film to be as realistic as possible, shooting on location and using natural lighting, such as when the cloud goes overhead on the field as Clyde chases Bonnie. They wanted the film to be un-theatrical and wished to avoid creating any beauty in the film through cinematography, romance, or any way in which the film was made.
Dede Allen, the films editor, also took inspiration from the French New Wave. Her approach to editing was to avoid conventions, instead utilising apparent and often jarring methods. One editing technique popularised by the French New Wave was hard cuts, which are used in Bonnie & Clyde. Another is non-temporal editing, as often characters will be moving on one shot but much further on in time when the next shot appears, making the moment unnatural and the movement of the actor and editing of the scene jumpy and sometimes slightly jarring, alerting the audience to the films production. As did Penn and Beatty, she aimed to avoid any sort of conformity or comfortable typicality in the film that audiences were used to from other’s, using editing techniques that had an undertone of being unfinished/unpolished.
Arthur Penn took inspiration from the unconventional, unique style of filmmaking in the French New Wave. He incorporated this into Bonnie & Clyde in the overall product of the film feeling unfinished and different, clearly made with the aim of feeling different to other, more traditional films with strict narratives and forms of editing, cinematography, etc. He did this through making sure that the script felt off with its unnatural, for a film, dialogue that emulated real, un- orchestrated dialogue, similarly to the natural lighting and camera work affected by the hilly landscape it was filmed on, such as camera inside the car shaking as Bonnie and Clyde pulling up to see Malcom at the end of the film.
Beatty (centre) had a large part in the presentation of Clyde as a flawed protagonist, but also the overall production of the film with inspiration taken from the French New Wave style of filmmaking.
After the collapse of the Hollywood studio system and cinemas became free to exhibit films of their own choice, including foreign and independent films, directors were left with more freedom to experiment and produce films as they wanted, leading to a dramatic rise in auteur productions that began largely due to the heavily innovative and radically different way that Bonnie & Clyde (Arthur Penn, 1967) was made. The film utilised temporal cuts that did not adhere to typical, seamless continuity editing, and presented new themes of sexuality and crime set against the backdrop of the Great Depression, blending dark comedy and brutality not sen often in film before. Arthur Penn had the freedom to take inspiration from the French New Wave due to the collapse of the Hollywood studio system and the subsequent ending of strict narrative conformity and unnoticeable editing to keep focus on the story.
Penn, Beatty and Allen all took heavy inspiration from the French New Wave, exhibited in America due to the increased freedom of cinemas to exhibit foreign films. The French New Wave was a new and innovative style of filmmaking from France that had placed emphasis on ‘outsider’ characters and how they perceived and interacted with the contemporary urban environments they lived in, often influenced by social deprivation and real social issues that existed at the time. The movement also favoured a casual, new approach to film making, with often handheld camera work, low budgets, hard cuts and non-continuity editing. They also experimented with portraying more realistic depictions of society, characters and themes that surrounded the story what had not been outwardly shown before under the Hays Code, such as violence, used in Bonnie & Clyde in a comedic setting, crime and sexuality. The film is shot on location using naturalistic lighting, politically motivated and a realistic character driven story.
Bonnie & Clyde was made in the backdrop of the 1960s, a period where typical American values were being reevaluated and the population were mor accepting of how the characters in the film were portrayed. Having morally grey characters was more likely to happen in the 1960s than the 1940s, and this also goes for the sexual imagery (included in the first shot, no less. Also e.g., when Bonnie is embarrassed by the by Clyde taking his shoe off in the street) nudity (which is involved in the first scene), violence shown in graphic detail through blood and squibs, the (almost) sex scenes, common nature of guns and robbery and kidnapping and murder in the plot, even the implication that Clyde is homosexual. It’s anti-establishment attitude( e.g Clyde shooting the bank’s sign), youthful and criminal protagonists resonated with younger audiences. An example is how Malcom punishes Moss for getting a tattoo, dismissing the protagonists. He is portrayed as a villain in the film, and is resonated with young audience members who wanted to dissent from their parents.
The brash attitudes and immoral choices of the characters were more acceptable in the 1960s, including Clyde’s arrogance and Bonnie’s smug attitude.
In this final scene, Bonnie and Clyde go shopping and enjoy a day out together before noticing a pair of cops and driving away. During said drive, they notice Malcom, C.W Moss’s dad, and stop to help him with what he claims is a flat tyre. After he leaps under his truck in fear, Bonnie and Clyde realise that this is a trap, and make for each other before being brutally shot down by a group of police with rifles hidden in the bushes beside the road. The cops investigate the two’s bodies, confirming that they are dead.
Key Elements:
Cinematography –
Unlike other scenes in this film, the final sequence is mostly done via stationary camera that smoothly glide to track the characters. The scene begins with Bonnie and Clyde centre frame to bring our attention to the, and the camera smoothly crabs left to follow their journey to the car. It tilts up to show Clyde and then tilts down to track his sitting into the car. He and Bonnie and kept in frame constantly to keep our attention on them here. She is even kept in frame from over his shoulder. Reaction shorts are also used as he drops his lens. Inside the car, he and Bonnie are shown close together to signal their emotional connection. When Clyde asks about getting ice cream, he points at the parlour, which is in frame but in the background as the focus is on them. A close up is used on Bonnie’s doll as she describes it, showing us what to pay attention to. Reaction shots are also used as Moss looks out the window at the events unfolding.
The camera gets tighter between the couple as the sequence goes on, showing how close they are to one another now. It is tightest on them as they eat the pear together, showing their emotional connection through physical proximity. Shot reverse shots are used as they drive up and speak to Malcom, such as him waving and them pulling over to talk to him. Despite this, the camera shakes inside the car as they pull up, and canted angles are used due to the camera being placed on a small slope to show the car pulling up. Reaction shots are used constantly towards the end of the scene, showing Malcom’s fear of being shot, and Bonnie and Clyde’s realisation that they are about to be killed. Through the finals shot of the couple lingering on their bodies, the film forces the audience to confront the tragedy of the situation and the brutality of the scene. The camera smoothly glides over to track the movements of the people walking up to the car, keeping our attention on them, the brutal scene that they have caused, and their reactions to it.
Sound –
The lack of non-diegetic composed music in this scene, including the typical blue gras music that accompanies the car scenes in this film, created tension and builds a sense of tragedy in the tone of the film.
Editing –
There are rapid shot reverse shots towards the end of the scene, building tension and showing the realisation of the characters of what is about to happen, signalling it to the audience. This rapid use of redaction shots is unlike normal continuity editing, edited instead almost as a montage. The use of slow motion forces the audience to confront the brutality of the killings for longer. They are not shot in the face though, as the film still wants to present it’s attractive, glamorous movie stars, who are made to appear as such throughout the film.
Mise-En-Scen –
Bonnie and Clyde wear bright clothing to bring our attention to them and present them as more innocent. The pear they eat serves as sexual imagery to represent how they are closer to each other now, and more trusting of each other, also implying that Clyde has gotten over his hesitance to move forward in his relationship with Bonnie. This makes their brutal end more tragic. The blood used to show gunshots make the final scene more brutal and shocking to the audience, forcing them to confront the violence and the consequences of the character’s actions.
Performance –
Despite their previous behaviours in the film, Bonnie and Clyde here are innocent, youthful and happy, Clyde acting clumsily and Bonnie giggling and fawning over him. This makes their deaths more sympathetic and tragic, eliciting an emotional response from the audience.
Context:
Representations and Aesthetics:
Despite their criminal career, brashness, smug attitudes and aggressiveness before this scene, Bonnie and Clyde are presented as more innocent characters here. Clyde makes the jokes, and Bonnie aughts gleefully at them. The cops are presented as the villains, the lead one wearing black, their faces grim and the group of them shown shattered glass, distancing the audience from them.
Auteur:
The amount of blood in this scene, though unconvincing, is brutal for the 1960s.
Clyde catches Bonnie, who has snuck away from the gang and ran into a dying wheat field. She says to him that she wants to see her mother again, and Clyde agrees despite the risk, and in the next scene Blanche, Buck, Bonnie and Clyde enjoy a family re-union at an abandoned industrial site. There is an air of tension to the scene which culminates when Bonnie’s elderly and disapproving mother confronts Clyde and questions his plans and the safety eh van provide for Bonnie. His charm does not work on her, and she finishes by saying “You best keep running, Clyde Barrow” and leaves the couple alone by the site.
Key Elements:
Cinematography –
At the beginning of this scene, the style of filmmaking swaps between conventional American commercial filmmaking and the French New Wave style which influenced Arthur Penn’s direction. The scene is filmed on long lenses in the French style, and the camera movements following Clyde and improvised, causing the movement to be rapid, sudden and disconcerting to the audience. However, as Clyde runs next to the car, the camera filming moves backwards on a rig to produce a steady image, mo vying to show Buck as Clyde leans in to talk to him. An extreme wide shot is used as the actors improvise, running across the field. As the lighting cannot be controlled, because the film was shot on location in the French style, the shadow in this wide shot is no longer there when the scene cuts to a closer shot lol Bonnie running. Even in this wide shot though, the camera cranes upwards to follow the movement of the actors up the screen, a more traditional style of Hollywood filmmaking. In the closer shot, a what leaf obstructs the foreground, a sign of shooting on location rather than on a controlled, choreographed set.
Bonnie’s mother is shown in separate shots to everyone, showing her isolation and disapproval. During this picnic scene, the camera shoots through a car windscreen to serve as a filter that makes the image more grainy and giving the scene a dream-like quality. This is also done through washed out colours and far-away telephoto lends shots used for close-ups, such as the one with Bonnie’s mother, separating her from an incoherent, blurred background and adding a strange, incomplete feel to the shot. It gives the scene an other-worldly like atmosphere, adding a surreal quality to this entire sequence and making it feel more profound. This atmosphere serves as a metaphor, as the meaning behind the character’s’ expressions and the heavenly and strange atmosphere to the scene signifies that Bonnie and Clyde will die. This confusing lens the scene is shot through also prevents the audience from seeing clearly the fact that this scene takes place in a hidden industrial wasteland. This is symbolic of the direness of the characters’ situation, showing that they have to hide to survive, and also signifies the distractions Ned happiness they get when they are seen spending time together and playing in the pit. The location is shown through an establishing wide shot at the start of the scene and one at the end of it, a more conventional American style of cinematography.
Bonnie’s mothers’ words of “You best keep running, Clyde Barrow” are made to look more prophetic by the use of a long lens which isolates her from the background and the close up isolating her from everyone else, although this final conversation is done in traditional Hollywood style through shot-reverse-shots, close ups and over-shoulder shots.
Sound –
Editing –
The dissolve cut to the picnic scene is an example of traditional American commercial cinema editing. However, the scene with the family swaps between slow and normal motion and missing frames shots disconcert the audience to create an abstract and dream-like quality in the French New Wave style. There is also a moment of discontinuity when Bonnie;s mother is looking at Clyde in one close up and then down in the next.
Mise-En-Scen –
The dying wheat field serves as a metaphor for the fact that Bonnie and Clyde are destined for death. This is also signified in the funeral-like clothing that the characters are having a family reunion.We see how Bonnie’s character has changed through her lack of bright makeup and her more serious demeanour here.
Performance –
Blanche and Buck seems to be regretful, signifying that they know that Bonnie and Clyde will die, similarly to Bonnie’s mother’s sad demeanour, as opposed to Bonnie’s unsure expression and Clyde’s (and the children’s) clear ignorance. We see that Clyde’s boyish charm does not work on her mother as it did Bonnie at the start of the film, allowing for the mother so speak some actual truth for the first time in the film. In the final shot of the scene, Bonnie and Clyde are isolated, Clyde seeming confused and Bonnie worried, oscillated in a wide shot by being kept far away from Buck and Blanche who are clearly upset, foreshadowing the clear end of Bonnie and Clyde. It also leaves the entire gang alone in frame, showing their isolation from everyone else.
Context:
Representation and Aesthetics:
Auteur:
We can see Bonnie’s clear concern at the prophetic nature of her mother’s words, whereas Clyde is clearly ignorant to the dire reality of his situation, earning the disapproval of Bonnie’s mother.
In this scene, Bonnie and Clyde pull of their first bank heist with the help of their new recruit, C.W Moss, as their getaway driver. The best goes to plan, except when they get outside they cannot find the getaway car since Moss has parked it away from the bank. Chaos ensues as the bank’s alarm goes off and the public begin to converge at the scene. Eventually the couple find the car, but Moss struggles to pull out, causing a wreck and he reverses and accelerates into two other cars. They begin driving away, but a bank worker latches onto their car in pursuit of them. Clyde responds by shooting the man in the face, causing a violent scene as the man tumbles from the side of the car to the ground and Bonnie, Clyde and Moss drive away as people chase and shoot at them and the firefighters arrive.
Key Elements:
Cinematography –
An extreme long shot establishes the scene from under a roof awning. This makes the film look as if we are observing something by accident, adding a sense of realism to it. When Bonnie and Clyde enter the bank and take out their guns, Thayer are framed within a frame through a glass window to draw our attention to them.
As the car escapes, the scene mirrors the initial getaway scene, here without the jovial, jaunty music played before, taking a more serious, dramatic tone after the act of violence committed by Clyde.
Sound –
The sequence begins with a J cut from Clyde in bed transitioned by a loud car beep to establish the new location, which is also done through an extreme long shot with the crossroads outside of the bank centre frame.
Editing –
The scenes of the robbery in the bank and Moss outside are parallel edited to raise tension and signal to the audience that something bad is going to happen in a more conventional way of Hollywood filmmaking.
Mise-En-Scen –
The buildings shown look old and abandoned, showing the backdrop of the Depression and signalling that the south is in an economic decline. As the film was shot on location, the filmmakers choose to film in the Southern states to portray an area suffering the impacts of the Great Depression.
Bonnie wears a beret, a small nod to the inspiration taken by the filmmakers from the French New Wave.
Performance –
The extras in this scene were civilians asked by the filmmakers to serve as extras to add to the sense of realism and truthfulness prevalent in the French New Wave style of filmmaking.
Context:
The scene within the bank is largely improvised, striving for a realistic depiction similar to a documentary or unscripted sequence of events not played by professional actors.
Representations and Aesthetics:
When the pursuer chasing Bonnie and Clyde’s getaway vehicle is shot in the face by Clyde, we see an close up of the impact it creates. A large spray of blood against an agonised face is extremely violent and shocking for a mainstream film in the 1960s. The violence is shown centre frame and close up, even cutting back to it in an unnecessary and brutal shit reverse shot between it and the man who did the act, forcing the audience to confront it and the brutal actions of the protagonists, who we like and are attached to, but we have to face the consequences of their actions. It does not ruin them, but cements them as flawed ‘anti-hero’s’, displaying in graphic detail for the time the consequences of their actions.
Auteur:
Warren Beatty (left) had a massive hand in the films final product as its producer, portraying Clyde as an imperfect protagonist, differing from typical Hollywood strong male leads at the time. He also helped create the films shoddy but realistic dialogue, often improvised, and influenced its feel as an imperfect, casual, fun and low-budget production, heavily inspired by the French New Wave.
Bonnie Parker lies naked and clearly frustrated by her boredom at home. She sees a man outside trying to steal her mother’s car, who she confronts. She quickly falls for the man and walks into town for him, asking questions about him and where he’s from. He shocks her by revealing that he has been released from state prison for armed robbery. She provokes him to rob a store to prove that he did so, which he promptly does, forcing the couple to giddily flee the town in a stolen car together. The man reveals that his name is Clyde Barrow.
Key Elements:
Cinematography –
The film intersperses the opening credits worth real photographs taken from the Great Depression era of the 1930s, grounding the film in the real life time period and economic climate it takes place in. Film camera shutter clicks are times with he cutting of photos and credits to further establish the olden time period. The names of the actors fade to a red font, foreshadowing violence. Pictures of them in character further grounding these characters as real people. A lack of non-diegetic sound here immerses the audience and gives the film a documentary film, also due to the real images shown here.
The film does not follow the conventional Classical Hollywood Style of introducing the location of the new scene is set in to the audience through an immediate establishing shot, instead opening on an extreme close up of Bonnie’s lips, immediately sexualising her. This shot is disorienting for the audience due to the lack of context to buildup to it. The camera pans to show her reflection in a mirror, done with a hand-held camera, new technology at the time that had been embraced by the French New Wave for its casual apparel and easy use. Making films for a low profit utilising a small budget with low cost equipment. The camerawork feels improvised with not pre-planning or choreography, instead filmed in the moment, similarly to the performances and dialogue. The entire sequence is shot through close-ups os Bonnie’s face, keeping the environment hidden to the audience and therefore going directly against the Classical Hollywood Style, instead concentrating on conveying her frustration and boredom over the location. This is seen in how the camera rises up to an extreme close up of her eyes looking off screen at nothing in particular. When this happens, the camera misses the focus point, and we can see it re-focus onto her face, which makes the cinematography feel improvised and causal, taking inspiration from the French New Wave style of filmmaking,
Clyde and her are shown in shot reverse shots through a netting over her bedroom window. This is not removed to improve the clarity of the shot for the audience, instead obscuring the view. This is because, in the style of the French New Wave, the filmmakers always shot on location instead of on set because it was cheaper and gave the films a sense of realism. This also results in no control over the lighting of the scene, seen in how Clyde is in shadow when peering into Bonnie’s mothers’ car. The film was shot on location in southern states since they were the poorer ones in the 1960s that had not yet fully recovered from the Great Depression, and so still looked economically damaged. Zoom lenses are used in the film to captures the action from a distance and reduce the need to stop and start the shooting constantly for new shots.
Despite the story being largely about crime, we are not shown the robbery here, as the film primarily focuses on the relationship between Bonnie and Clyde, a pair of people who rob banks. The film denies the audience the pleasure of seeing the action, which they expect to see, to instead keep their attention on the emotional connection between the two protagonists. As the two escape in a stolen car, inside the car we see a projected backdrop, but outside it the film was shot on a real location in rural Souther Texas.
Sound –
When Bonnie confront Clyde outside, the dialogue is poor quality and very hard to hear, both due to the strongly southern accents and the poor sound quality. This is because the film was short on location, and so the dialogue said while shooting is what we hear, and isn’t added or clarified/improved in post-production.
The majority of the sequence contains only diegetic sound as the films was shot on location, adding to the sense of realism and truthfulness prevalent in the film and how it is made. As the couple escape, a jaunty upbeat bluegrass banjo tune plays to give the scene an excited, jovial and care-free feeling, reinforcing the tone of the film, a love story with a backdrop of crime. It also shows how much fun the two have while/from robbing places.
Editing –
Mise-En-Scen –
Bonnie being shown behind the bars of her bed is symbolic of her feeling imprisoned in her home.
As the two walk though the street together, we see the paint on the walls peeling off, and a quiet and empty street. This shows the backdrop of poverty in the story, but what location shown is real due to the film being shot on location, typical of the French New Wave style of filmmaking.
Performance –
In her room, Bonnie’s movement are random and seemingly in-planned, adding a sense of realism and improvisation to the scene. Her accent is deeply southern instead of an artificial Mid-Atlantic accent to portray a more realistic representation of the regional accent and the characters in the film.
As Clyde walks across the road to rob the store, we see he has a prominent limp. This links to his story about him chopping of two of his own toes in prison to get off of work detail, portraying him as a mysterious and flawed character, and Warren Beatty method acted to achieve a sense of realism in the film.
Context:
F.D.R campaign posters are plastered on walls to immerse the audience in the 1930s time period, alongside the decaying town which establishes the impact of the Depression on society.
Representations and Aesthetics:
For 1967, this is a borderline offensive and at least a risky way of presenting a leading female role. It is provocative and suggestive, establishing Bonnie as a rebellious character in the 1930s and edging what can be permitted to be shown in a film by the Hayes Code. This can also be seen in how flirtatious she is with Clyde, and the phallic imagery used in the coke bottles and Clyde’s pistol, sexually suggestive imagery considered edgy in the 1960s. The film also presents Bonnie’s beauty in a naturalistic way, showing her without much intervention or artificial beauty created through the use of lighting to highlight or enhance her features.
Bonnie is a bored, uneducated waitress living in a small, quiet town. Clyde is an ex-convict bank robber. As is characteristic of the French New Wave, the film follows two real people living real lives, making the story (somewhat) more relatable for the people watching it.
Auteur:
Dede Allen allowed for the film’s sound design to be deliberately shoddy as she took much inspiration from the French New Wave style of filmmaking and editing. Robert Pentonville and David Newman made the dialogue feel real and I provided, which it largely was, to add to the sense of realism in the film. The director, Arthur Penn, and Warren Beatty, the producer, both made the film feel authentic and realistic in its style through a deliberately poor quality for a Hollywood film.
Some directors in America had been inspired but the various methods of the French New Wave, such as focus on realism, hand-held camera work and improvised dialogue. The focus on serious plots had fallen after the decline of Hollywood, and the French New Wave galvanised some young American directors to take a more causal, relaxed and fun approach to filmmaking. This inspiration also culminated in rapid shifts in the tone of the film and abrasive/rough editing.
David Newman and Robert Benton were both screenwriters who had no particular style of screenwriting, or a focus on any particular genre, tone or motif. There was no recognisable aspect of their scripts that associated the film with the screenwriters. They took inspiration from the French New Wave in their approach to fun, causal film script as with often improvised dialogue or realistic dialogue. For example, they were both inspired by the unconventional relationship between the characters Patricia and Michel in Godard’s Breathless (Godard, 1960) In fact, Bonnie’s poem in the film mirrors the exchange of letters between Jim and Catherine in Jules et Jim (Truffaut, 1962) When writing the film, French New Wave director Francois Truffaut screened the film Gun Crazy (Joseph Lewis, 1950) as he had loved it. This also led to Warner Bros. Advertising the film as a violent crime genre film and star vehicle. It was the two scriptwriters who brought Penn onto the film when Truffaut himself could not.
A director who took inspiration from the French New Wave was Arthur Penn. He was a director who made his name through Bonnie and Clyde (Arthur Penn, 1967), and was not recognised for many other productions. He was a director-for-hire who did not have any recognisable motifs of his own, instead taking his ideas from the French New Wave style of directing, with a focus on realism and deliberately casual way of filmmaking. He favoured shooting on location with small production teams, many of his films displaying American myths/culture, Classic American genres and ‘outsider’ characters.
Dede Allen is considered an auteur Hollywood director, taking inspiration from the French New Wave and stylising jump cuts used for emotional effect, audio overlaps, placing continuity editing at a low priority and instead focusing on expressing the body-language of characters through cutting and conveying the plot in a nuanced way.
Warren Beatty, the actor who played Clyde Barrow in the film, also produced it and made up contributed attributions to the script through their improvised dialogue. He had wanted Clyde to be presented as a flawed protagonist, an anti-hero, and played the character that way. As producer, he made contributions that made the film what it was, an imperfectly produced film taking heavy inspiration from the French New Wave style of filmmaking. He hired Newman and Benton, selected most of the cast and oversaw the script’s development. His role in production reflects the rise of ‘star-auteurs’ in the 1960s, for example Jack Nicholson, who also directed and produced films.
While the Hollywood studio system was in decline and studios were having to search for new and interesting ways of conveying stories and making films, the filmmakers in France were experimenting with new and radically different methods of filmmaking. A group of young Cahiers Du Cinema writers/editors had began making films to contrast the perception of film as a high-art that adhered to a pre-existing, strict narrative convention. This resulted in new, low-budget productions that fox used on being deliberately poorly-made and brining the audiences attention to the production of the film itself, serving as fun, entertaining but often involving deeper themes, such as Jean Luc Godard’s repetition of reference to high-art in his films.
New French directors such as François Truffaut and Agnès Varda were focusing creating new, radical films that went against established conventions such as narrative linearity. This led to the rise of auteur directors like Godard, whose films became recognisable. These directors rejected the post-war “Tradition of Quality” in French Cinema which fell back on the comfort of old traditions emphasised old works over new and innovative films. These filmmakers sought to go against the safe adaptations of classical literary works and instead utilised low-budget equipment and deliberately poor-writing to create fun and poor-quality films. Godard, for example, considered the convention of narrative linearity oppressive and deterministic. They were inspired by Classical Hollywood and Italian Neo-Realism, adding their own contemporary, avant-garde styles of direction.
The French New Wave was most popular between the late 1950s and early 1960s. Most of these directors were born in Paris and grew up their in the 1930s, therefore their films related to the youth growing up in that city, such as through the representation of fashion, parties and urban-life.
American director Arthur Penn commented that “young people understood this movie instantly. They sae Bonnie and Clyde as rebels like themselves. It was a movie that spoke to a generation in a way none of use had really expected.” Anastasia & Macnow, 2011.
These directors used low-budget equipment such as hand-held cameras and film stock that required less light. This resulted in films with discontinuous editing, poor sound design and un-convincing acting. Questions raised but not answered in the film would raise narrative ambiguity through the combination of subjectivity and realism. Long takes, the use of jump-cuts and a sense of minimalism in the films were a result of a lack of stock to shoot with. The 180 degree axis would be broke, characters would step out of their roles to address the audience directly, rapid scene changes and improvised dialogue.
After the Paramount v.s U.S case in 1948, the 8 major Hollywood studios lost the legal right to control all the aspects of a films financing, production and distribution. This led to the decline of the Hollywood studio system, as the studios could no longer hold a monopoly on the film industry and theatres could choose what films to show. This allowed for increased access to the market from independent filmmakers and foreign films, such as ones from France. This led to increased competition between the studios, which in turn forced them to seek out more competitive and new types of films to guarantee them being shown by the cinemas.
The competition was intensified by the rise of the middle-class in America in the 1950-60s and the subsequent increased spending money Fiordland luxury items like radios and the newly created TV. Therefore, the rise of TV’s increased rapidly after 1950, and the studios had to compete with them as most audiences would rather have stayed at home rather than to travel further from the suburbs and pay to watch a film at a cinema. Therefore, the cinemas began to produce wider and more impressive screens to attract audiences to travel and pay to see new films there.
The increased market created through the new found freedom of cinemas to choose what to show, allowed for independent filmmakers to create more interesting and unique films that did not follow typical film narrative or convention. This meant increased freedom amongst filmmakers to make what they wanted, such as the increased possibilities to create films inspired by those from France.
Therefore, while the studios were tying to produce bigger and more entertaining films to draw in bigger audiences and therefore larger profits, independent films were being made by independent directors to produce films for more niche audiences that would be big enough to support these lower-budget films.
Before the decline of the studio system, very few foreign films were shown in the U.S. After the decline, there was increased space for films from places like Europe to be shown in Americans cinemas. This allowed for the recently formed French New Wave movement that had been formed by young, enthusiastic filmmakers from France who wanted to create new, fun, “improperly” made films that defied traditional film conventions, such as all focus being placed on the story. The increased screenings of these films in America led to some American filmmakers taking inspiration from them, and the increased need for the studios to produce better, more competitive and new films, allowed for films like those in the French New Wave, films like Bonnie and Clyde (Arthur Penn, 1967).
Arthur Penn, the film’s director, was active in the 1960s, making films that focused on the darker aspects of American society, particularly crime, following protagonists who were criminals on the run. He took heavy inspiration from the French New Wave movement and is largely associated with New Hollywood. He utilised radically different styles of filmmaking from the conventions established in the 1940s, shooting scenes in completely different ways, and deliberately editing, writing and shooting the films in a way that brought audience attention to the actual creation of the films, such as moment where sound randomly cuts out or a shot cuts to the same shot, just further on in time. This took heavily from the French New Wave, which focused on creating low-budget, fun and entertaining films.
Bonnie and Clyde (Arthur Penn, 1967) follows two young people, Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow, who travel Texas and rob banks. The film follows their rampage across the county as they gain new members to their ‘Barrow Gang’, showing us their ethics, methods and relationships with each other, and are eventually cornered and shot down by the laws.
The film was made by Arthur Penn, who took inspiration from the French New Wave movement in Europe, where young and enthusiastic filmmakers were defying traditional forms of filmmaking by utilising low-budgets, cheap equipment and actors and going against traditional forms of filmmaking. Therefore, Bonnie and Clyde takes from many of the techniques popularised in France at the time, containing many (all deliberately) badly edited scenes, rough audio, bad acting and poor scriptwriting. Despite this, it is a completely linear narrative.
I found the film entertaining but confusing in it’s purposeful rough quality and almost ‘anti-film’ methods of conveying the story. There is no effort to immerse the audience in the story, and so the passage of time is hard to gauge and the plot feels fast and disjointed. I rate Bonnie and Clyde ★★!
Warner Bros. Was known for producing gritty, social realism crime dramas set in urban settings and typically following an experienced, dry detective, typically on a case involving murder or disappearance or kidnapping. This is what they were recognised for, and what audiences came to see, alongside the stable of stars they had, such as Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman.
Because of how crucial the actors were to the success of a film, the studio made efforts to boast them in advertising the film and in the film present them as more important, glamorous, important and larger-than-life. This is why Bergman is presented as glamorous and beautiful in Casablanca, and Rick is presented as gruff, weathered and experienced, as the audiences came to see the stars play their usual character types.
Because the unique selling point of Warner Bros. Films also being an attraction for audiences, they typically stuck to it in their films. This involved film noir tropes, like dark lighting, Smokey environments, characters who drink unhealthily, pessimistic attitudes, social issues, murder, shootouts and film noir fashion aesthetics, such as trench coats and fedoras.
Jack Warner, the head of Warner Bros. In 1942, was an interventionist in favour of joining the war in Europe. He wanted to produce a film that was pro-interventionist. Hal B. Wallis, the films producer, was also a republican in favour of preserving traditional American beliefs and values. Therefore, Casablanca is a romance film set in the war, and serves as an allegory of the war and America’s involvement in the war. Michael Curtiz, the films director, had focused on the ‘human-side’ of a story, typically following underdog, beaten-down heroes in his films, usually fighting against an upper, oppressive force, dealing with issues such as social injustice, oppression and exile, such as in Casablanca. Arthur Edeson, the director of photography, had built a career in portrait photography, which accounts for the emasculate presentation of the actors of importance and fame in Casablanca. The composer, Max Steiner, limited himself with how much his music held the attention of the audience, instead keeping the focus on the emotions meant to be evoked in the audience and presented in the film, which he would communicate through the music.
Jack Warner’s name is credited first and foremost in Casablanca, establishing his crucial role in the production of the film, which he wanted to serve as a pro-interventionist film. It was the work of Wallis, Curtiz, Steiner, Edeson and the stars that made the film what it was in the end, a patriotic romance film set in WW2.
In Hollywood during the 1930s, many different film genres were becoming popular. These included musicals, historic and biblical epics, comedies and so on. Because of the highly competitive studio system at the time, the big 5 major film studios all had a unique selling point for their films, for example MGM focused on bright, colourful and glitzy, glamorous musicals.
Warner Bros. Focused on gritty crime and gangster films, centred around social realism. This can be seen in their big star, Humphrey Bogart, who was known for not being a conventionally attractive film star, and was instead known for his rugged looks and weathered face. Around this time in Hollywood, particularly done by Warner Bros., the film noir movement was becoming popular. These were films centred around themes of pessimism and fatalism, typically characterised by gritty crime dramas following a weathered and burdened detective, smoking a cigar, sipping whiskey, wearing a trench coat and fedora while soft jazz played in the bar where they brooded over a tough case.
Because of Warner Bros.’ Focus on social realism and film noir, there are many aspects of Casablanca that reflect this, such as a brooding, pessimistic protagonist with an affinity for alcohol and cigarettes, much of the film being set in a dim and smoky bar/cafe, dim lighting, an elegant damsel in distress, corrupt police, and a (brief) murder mystery.
The studios at the time also boasted their stable of stars, glamorous and popular actors that would often serve as the pivot on which the film made money or not. The studios would plaster the faces of their biggest stars on posters, their names in big, bold letters. Stars, for this reason, would often play a caricature that they played in all films they were in, almost like they were playing themselves. Humphrey Bogart, for example, always played the gruff, weathered, pessimistic Rick, as that was what the audiences paid to see. The stars themselves were always presented in the most glamorous, eye-catching light in the films too, as the studios knew that they were what attracted most audiences. This is why Ilsa and Rick are presented the way that they are in the film.
Around the time that Casablanca was being produced, war had broken out in Europe, with France being occupied by Nazi Germany and England being pushed out of mainland Europe by Nazi Germany. Due to prevalent isolationist attitudes in America at the time, America had been refusing to get involved in the conflict, remaining completely neutral, as Rick does at the start of the film. Jack Warner, the head of Warner Bros. At the time, was an interventionist who believed that America should be getting involved in the war on the side of England and France and fighting against Germany. He wheeled Casablanca into production because he wanted there to be a film that was in support of a patriotic entrance into WW2 as the saviours of Europe and the victorious, powerful nation of America.
Black and white technology was old and commonly used by the 1940s, and colour was still a new expensive and unpolished/unperfected technology. Therefore, Casablanca was shot in black and white, as that technology had been perfected over decades of use and was viewed as a mature, beautiful way of filmmaking.
The Big Sleep (Howard Hawks, 1946) is another Warner Bros. Film noir movie starring Bogart as the lead, a private investigator.
The scene begins with a mid-shot of an airport worker, tracks his movement outside, then rests o n the car pulling up, tracks the movement of the people walking out, then pulls our further to a five shot to show the worker that Renault is speaking to. This is the perfect example of Classical Hollywood Style, preventing the need for cutting by using carefully planned actor choreography and smooth, gliding camera movements to keep the audience immersed, keeping their attention away from how the film was made and keeping it only on the story and the characters.
Instead of using shot reverse shots, a close up of Rick and Ilsa is used to prevent the need for cutting, keeping the audience immersed in the moment and emotionally invested in it, and also showing Rick and Ilsa’s emotional connection and intimacy in that moment. Very shallow focus is used here to show that nothing else matters in the moment.
A close up of Ilsa keep or focus on her emotional reaction to what Rick is saying. It does this again by pushing in on her face as her and Lazlo leave to bring our attention to her emotional state, making us understand the emotional importance of this moment in the film and making us sympathise with her. Rick is also lit more similarly to Ilsa in this scene, which shows that they have moved past their hatred for each other, and that Rick has become a better person.
Editing –
Shot reverse shots between the plane leaving and the Nazi arriving raise tension as the audience link is the two together and understand that Lazlo and Ilsa have nearly left, but now Rick is about to be arrested, as Renault has explained through exposition that he will, and Rick told him to as soon as the plane left. Faster shot reverse shots between Rick and the Nazi raise the tension between them, and an over the shoulder shot from behind the Nazi looking at Rick shows that Rick won the quickdraw. Shot reverse shots between Renault and Rick as Renault explains the death of the Nazi to his men raises tension, and shows an emotional connection between the two and a deliberate decision on Renaults part to help Rick.
Sound –
As Rick and Ilsa say their emotional goodbyes, As Time Goes By plays to add emotional subtext to the scene. The non diegetic composed score picks up to an intense and dramatic moment as we the the Nazi driving quickly to the airport. As the film ends, the composed score rises to a grand and powerful crescendo to signify the importance and victory of the moment.
Mise-En-Scen –
Performance –
Context:
Lazlo’s dialogue is patriotic, rousing and moving, a result of this film being an interventionist piece. Rick is presented as a noble American hero by offering the Nazi three chances to do as he says, and only shoots him when the Nazi also draws a gun. This is symbolic of America finally getting involved in the war after being reluctant to for so long. Renaults decision to drop his Vichy (French allied with Nazi Germany) water bottle into a bin and kick it to show his anger and him being finished with the Nazis. Ricks saying that now is a good time to start being a patriot, and Renaults agreement, are symbolic of the need for America to join the war.
Representation and Aesthetics:
Auteur:
An over the shoulder shot here shows what the protagonist is looking at.
In this sequence, Rick sits alone in his cafe at night, drinking in the dark. Sam begs him to leave, but Rick refuses to, waiting for Ilsa to return. Sam decides to stay, and upon being told to by Rick plays As Time Goes By. This evokes a flashback from Rick, which shows that he and Ilsa used to live in Paris together near the start of the war, and were deeply in love. However, as the Germans marched into Paris, they fled, which plans to leave together. However, Rick is abandoned at the train station, receiving a note from Sam written by Ilsa apologising, saying that she cannot leave with him. We cut back to the present, in the cafe, and see how grief stricken Rick is over the loss. Ilsa then enters and pleads Rick for help, but is met with butter indifference from him.
Key Elements:
Cinematography –
The sequence begins with a mid shot of Rick, him pouring a drink to immediately establish that he is drunk. This mid shot shows that he is the centre of this scene, and dolly’s out to reveal Sam walking through to discover Rick. Rick is shown in dim light, his face only shown by a dim key light. This reflects his dark and depressed mood, and shrouds his character in mystery as-well as making him appear more rugged and weathered to us. Later on, we see the extreme contrast between him and Ilsa, whop wears bright clothes, has smooth, light skin, and is shipowners in deep focus with much light shining on her. When Sam and Rick talk to each other, both are shown in a two shot. When Rick ins monopolising to himself, it is through a close up to signify his emotions and bring the audience physically, and therefore emotionally closer to him.
In the Paris flashback, a projection is used behind the actors as the film was actually shot on location. During this flashback, there are many more close ups of Ilsa than there are of Rick. This brings our attention to her, putting us in Rick’s position of looking back on the past, thinking of her, and brings our attention to her glamorous presentation as-well. The lighting on her is done to make her seem much more elegant and beautiful, delicate and fragile than Rick. When she is distraught at having to leave Paris, we see a close up of her, not Rick, to keep our focus on her emotions, her presentation, and the meaning of her words and her eyes, made eye-catching by the catchlights in them, establishing an emotional connection withy the audience.
During this sequence, certain things that were mentioned already in the film have significance, such as As Time Goes by, the Labelle Aurore cafe, and “Here’s looking at you, kid”.
When Ilsa enters the cafe, a literal blast of light comes in with her two instantly bring our attention to her, show her innocence compared to Rick, and make her appear more angel-like. She is also centre-frame, making her entrance even more dramatic. As she speaks to Rick, she is shown in light, symbolising her purity and his lack of it.
Editing –
We cut to a close up of Rick as Sam stars playing, because the film wants to focus our attention in on whoever is speaking or most important in a moment, which here is Rick. This highlights his significance to the story, and shows us his facial expressions to make his emotions clearer and thereby establish an emotional connection with the audience.
In a moment that deviates from the Classical Hollywood Style, the scene fades to reveal a flashback to Paris, breaking the linear narrative for a scene. We dolly closer to Rick here to show that he is thinking of it, looking back on the past. Throughout the happy moments of this flashback sequence, the camera cross-fades between shots to evolve the feeling of happiness, and show how much Ilsa and Rick enjoyed their time together. Real war footage is used in this flashback to immerse us in the war and set the film, in a real setting and time, and making the events shown contemporary. An actual sign is used to show that they are entering Paris, allowing the audience to make the connection between the German’s entering and Rick and Ilsa being there.
Sound –
The music soars into a crescendo as the flashback stars, paying the French National Anthem to evoke themes/feelings of patriotism and establish the new setting of the story for the audience. The music reflects how the film wants the audience to feel, so when Rick and Ilsa are happy together the music is upbeat and lively. When Rick sees the note left by Ilsa, the music soars up into a dramatic and sad crescendo. As he leaves the station with Sam, it drops to a horn-based, angry and tragic moment. This is finally done as Ilsa leaves Rick’s cafe in tears and Rick drives through himself, and a more tragic and pessimistic As Time Goes By plays.
Mise-En-Scen –
Sam wears much darker clothes compared to Rick, to show that Rick is a more important character here. In the Paris flashback, the film shows us that the characters are in Paris through the music, set design, and the stereotypical French items in frame, such as berets, striped shirts and strings of garlic.
As Rick stands at the train station, he is presented in a trance coat and hat, a classic film-noir outfits used as a reference to his other film noir roles and to make him seem more masculine. In contrast, Ilsa’s outfit as she speaks to Rick in his cafe, in the present, is carefully done and made to make her look delicate and beautiful.
Performance –
Context:
Ricks ability to unrealistically tell how far away the approaching tanks are sacrificed realism for the provision of context to the audience. This is also seen in how exposition heavy the script is to reveal important contextual information to the audience.
Representations and Aesthetics:
Auteur:
Rick is shown in darkness with the bottle clearly visible next to him, showing us his coping mechanism, and his emotional state through the lighting. The mid-shot brings our attention to his defeated and agonised expression.
In this scene, we see that Ilsa and Sam have a past, and are connected through the song As Time Goes By, and Sam, for some reason, wishes for Ilsa to avoid Rick. Rick and Ilsa are reunited, although in the film this is the first time that we see them together. Rick is also introduced to Lazlo in the process. He and Ilsa reminisce over memories we, the audience, do not yet know of in full detail, making their history mysterious and intriguing the audience. Lazlo and Ilsa leave as there is a curfew in Casablanca.
Key Elements:
Cinematography –
Ingrid Bergman believed that one side of her face looked better than the other, and this affects how she is presented in the film, mostly from one side of her face more than the other, to maintain her presentation of an elegant, glamorous film star. This is also seen in how she is often presented in mid shots or close ups. In these, unlike closeups of Rick and male characters in the film, she is in focus whereas the background of the shot isn’t, bringing the audiences focus in on her.
To bring her reaction to our attention, a drawn out close up of Ilsa is used to show her emotional reaction to the song, As Time Goes By. This makes us connect and sympathise with her, manipulating them to evoke an emotional reaction to the film, and it keeps our attention on her presentation.
When Rick enters the scene, he is framed within a frame by an arch overhead through a low-angle shot as he walks into the light, making a dramatic entrance to signify his importance and status as a large star in the Warner Bros. Stable of actors.
As Renault and Lazlo enter the shot of Rick and Ilsa looking at each other, the camera pans to track their movements and set up a four shot, keeping them all in frame. It shot reverse shots between close ups of Rick and Lazlo to signify the importance of their small interaction, showing that both men have reputations that precede them. The actors are choreographed so that everything in frame that matters is visible to the audience, such as when Renault look back to call a waiter, and Lazlo has moved out of the way for us to see who Renault is speaking to much farther back in frame. The camera slowly and smoothly pedestals down as the actors sit, bringing us into their conversation. Then it cuts to a 3 shot of Ilsa, Renault and Lazlo to sin gift what Renault is saying to Ilsa. An over the shoulder shot from behind Ilsa looking at Rick brings our attention to their interaction and signifies its importance, and Ilsa is when in a close up to show her glamour and beauty, shown from the side with an above key and fill light illuminating her soft face and makeup. The key light on Rick is dimmer, so that more of the left side of his face is in shadow, presenting him as more mysterious, masculine, weathered and experienced. To prevent cutting between the 3, Ilsa, Renault and Lazlo are shown together in a 3 shot to allow us to look at whoever is speaking in a single moment, and who to. The camera rises again as they do, and the waiter is shown just between Renault and Lazlo. It finally drops again as Rick sits after the others have left and dolly’s into a mid shot of him, bringing our attention to his expression and again signifying the importance of his mysterious past relationship with Ilsa. He all but looks at the camera to display his emotions to the audience.
Editing –
The conversations in this sequence are done in Classical Hollywood style, shot reverse shots done to show who is important in a certain moment, such as Sam when he pleads Ilsa to leave Rick alone. For most of this conversation, the camera faces Ilsa through an over the shoulder shot from behind Sam, to bring our attention to her glamorous presentation.
Sound –
When Rick notices Ilsa, a sudden and deep note in the non-diegetic composed score signifies her importance/connection to him, catching the audiences attention and intriguing them in the history of the characters.
Mise-En-Scen –
Alongside her bright costume and pristine makeup, Ilsa is decorated by elaborate jewellery, one on her outfit and her earrings too. These reflect light in small, dazzling items of the frame, catching Ilsa in the audiences eyes more and complementing the catch lights illuminating her eyes.
While Rick has a classy and pristine suit, his skin is more wrinkly and rugged than Ilsa’s, and he is typically shown is less light and in deep focus close ups to make him stand out less than her.
Performance –
Humphrey Bogart almost always plays the same person, himself, making him more solidified and recognisable, even iconic as a star in the studio stystem, which Warner Bros. Wished to coast in this film through his dialogue, presentation and actions.
Context:
The studio makes efforts to utilise the set of Rick’s cafe to its fullest. It is an expansive and highly designed and detailed set, so about two thirds of the film take place in it. Camera movements and actor choreography are carefully done to make the set clear and immersive for the audience.
The film is a romance film as well as an interventionist piece. Therefore, it tries to affect the audience to evoke emotions and pull on the heartstrings. At its centre, it is melodramatic, and the script and production are done to manipulate the audience and make them feel certain things. This can be seen in this sequence through the dialogue, which is romantic, poetic and melodramatic as Rick and Ilsa look back on their past, and through the non-diegetic composed score, which has a somber, dramatic tone that is meant to evoke sadness in the audience to make them connect and sympathise with the protagonists of the film.
Representations and Aesthetics:
Auteur:
The camera has tracked the actor movement by panning right with the, and where Lazlo is stood now he will move to reveal a waiter behind him, who Renault calls over. The actor choreography and camera movement combine to reveal everything that is important to the story and audience to see in a frame.
This scene introduces Victor Lazlo and Ilsa to the film, who enter Rick’s cafe to meet with an ally of Lazlo’s cause. While there, they meet with but are bothered by Captain Renault and the German Major, who interrogates Lazlo and arranges a meeting for the next day. Lazlo stands his ground, but Ilsa is clearly worried for his safety.
Key Elements:
Cinematography –
As Lazlo and Ilsa enter the cafe, the camera tracks their movement, crabbing to the left to keep our focus on them. It does this as hey move through the cafe, coming to rest on Sam to show his concerned reaction to seeing Ilsa, signalling to the audience that there is a connection there. It does this also by showing a closer shot of Ilsa, focusing our attention on her concerned reaction. In close ups of Ilsa, she is in focus whereas the background is only in soft focus, unlike with the other characters, to keep our focus on her and present her as more beautiful.
As with the other sequences, in Classical Hollywood style, the carefully planned camera movements bring the expansive and detailed created set to our attention, immersing us in the environment. It also prevents the need for extensive cutting and distracting the audience from the story and dialogue. The choreography of the actors goes along with the camera movements, keeping everything essential in frame, and moving between different types of shots without much cutting. We see this with how the camera moves up and down as Lazlo is spoken down to by the German Major, and the camera tilts up slightly to keep our focus on Lazlo as he stands up to the oppressive forces against him. When Ilsa and Renault are talking, the scene shot-reverse-shots between them, and when four people are talking in one shot, the face of the person who isn’t, Ilsa, is not shown.
Editing –
Sound –
Editing is kept to a minimum and is all in service of the story in Classical Hollywood Style, but follows typical shot-reverse-shot fashion to show dialogue in a way that makes it digestible, not distracting the audience but directing their attention to what is important in a conversation at a certain moment, such as when Lazlo speaks to the secret resistance member, and it cuts between them to show whoever is talking in the moment.
The diegetic sound of Sam’s piano playing rises in the mix as Lazlo and Ilsa near him, immersing the audience in their position and the environment of Rick’s cafe. When it is more faint in the background, it melts into the rest of the sound mix, keeping the dialogue audible but preventing the scene from becoming silent, keeping the audience immersed in the cafe.
Mise-En-Scen –
Immediately the contrast between Lazlo and Ilsa is set, as Lazlo wears a white suit, but Ilsa wears a white dress which is much lighter and more eye-catching, brining our attention to her. This presents her as elegant, beautiful but more fragile than Lazlo.
Performance –
Lazlo is stoic and almost emotionless compared to Ilsa, who we see tearing up often, with clearly concerned or upset expressions. This presents her as more fragile and innocent than Lazlo, but also intrigues the audience as to her past relationship with Sam and Rick, which she makes clear when she sees them, hears or asks about them. Her accent is also Mid-Atlantic, a fictional accent that was popular in Hollywood at the time to act as a universal accent between American and British.
Context:
Warner Bros. Had a stable of actors which they wanted to exhibit to the audience to make most use of, similarly to the sets they use in this film. In this, the audiences attention is brought to Ilsa by her light dress, attractive presentation and the focus of each close up being on her. She is presented as the famous, glamorous film star that she was in real life.
Representations and Aesthetics:
Ilsa is presented as elegant and graceful, with flattering make up, catchlights to make her eyes more captivating and bring our attention to them, establishing an emotional connection with the audience, a captivating outfit and lighting that brings our attention to her. It makes her seem beautiful, but also more fragile and delicate than the males in the film, who are presented are more gruff and less soft. This also symbolises Ilsa’s innocence in contrast with characters like Lazlo and Rick. It also plays into Warner’s intent to create an interventionist film, portraying Ilsa, symbolically, as the weak, vulnerable and delicate European countries at risk of more aggressive, stronger powers. She is also presented like this to make her look glamorous and beautiful for the cameras, attracting audiences to see the film and boasting Warner Bros.’ Stable of actors.
The Nazi officer is portrayed as self-important, smug, proud, formal and entitled, whereas the French Chief of Police, Renault, is more polite, gracious and informal.
Auteur:
Despite her not being centre frame here, our attention is on Ilsa, due to her light dress and carefully done and elegant make up.
This scene takes place 6 minutes into the film, and introduces us to the protagonists place of business. It establishes the seedy and lawless nature of the cafe, immersing the audience in the world the protagonist rules over, showing multiple different illegal activities and exchanges that set an image of what life is like for many in Casablanca. At the end of the sequence, we are introduced to the protagonist, Rick, although he says nothing, and his actions and appearance are the only indicators of his character here.
Key Elements:
Cinematography –
This sequence is a perfect example of the subtlety of the classical Hollywood style, beginning with a long shot establishing the location, then cutting to a close up of the sign to direct the audiences attention and contextualise the scene. The camera then tilts down and follows a group of customers into the cafe, where the doorman holds the floor open for the camera and a waiter greets us, immediately immersing the audience in the environment. The camera glides smoothly around the set in a rare method for filmmaking in this time period. It is possible here because the set has been built and the actors have been blocked precisely to allow for the film to be made and for the location to be seen perfectly by the audience.
A wide shot displays the vast and complicated location crabs along the room, tracking the movements of a distant waiter, bringing us deeper into this location, where eventually the waiter leaves the frame and the camera smoothly glides down into a close up of Sam. We then cut to a new location, and the camera, again, carbs to the left and pedestals down to bring our attention to a pair of men, keeping the editing to a minimum and keeping our focus on the story, every small scenario here used to establish what life is like for those trying to escape Casablanca. Hopelessness, desperateness, and turning to illegal activity. They also establish the environment of Rick’s cafe, and what sort of people it attracts. This can be seen again where it pans from one small chipper of conversation between a pair of men doing something illegal to a man being served at the bar. This efficiency of storytelling all serves to contextualise Rick’s life.
Once again, a long shot of the waiter opening the door cuts to a wide shot that tracks his movement through a new location, to a close up of some new characters which dolly’s back to an over the shoulder shot 4 to shoot the dialogue. Everyone in all parts of the frame are kept in focus for us to see who is talking, and the camera smoothly follows the waiter so that we can follow the whole conversation. The scene is all one shbut is reframed seamlessly by the gliding camera movement.
We are introduced to Rick’s character before we even see him. The close up of his lazy signature on a document signifies his importance, and his silence signals that he is a stoic man of few words. A carefully framed close up reveals all in one frame his tendency to drink and smoke, and his strategic thinking through the chess board, which he plays the black pieces on, signifying his tendency to fight as the “underdog”. When he is revealed, no one else is in frame to keep our attention on only him, his face is in shadow and him being in a dark, lonely corner of the bustling cafe, making him appear gruff and mysterious, a large part of his character being revealed before he even speaks. This is also shown in how people look to him for approval to enter, and he only casually nods to say give permission.
Editing –
There are as few cuts as possible as we enter the cafe, immersing the audience due to keeping all focus away from the filmmaking and on the story and location/set design.
Sound –
As the camera nears Sam, the diegetic sound of his singing and the music he is playing rises to become the dominant sound in the sound mix, keeping our attention on him and further immersing us in the audience. This is also true when it L-cuts to a further location and the sound of his singing drops in the mix, but only enough so that we can infer we are still near him, or at least in the same area.
Mise-En-Scen –
The mixed costume design, from Western tuxedos to fez hats, shows how multicultural the location is, further contextualising the story.
Ricks suit is pristine and white, bringing our attention to him. It shows that he has class and style, and also shows his authority and importance over the black costumes that most of the cafe employees wear.
Performance –
The large mix of accents perpetuates the situation that Casablanca is in, fillies with immigrants trying to get out but failing.
Context:
As much of a films success at the time was dependant on the size of its cast, much buildup is made to emphasise Rick’s reveal, which in itself is a somewhat dramatic moment because of the way he is kept off frame at first before being revealed in a shot all by himself, the lighting illuminating his face and him immediately displaying his authority as owner of the cafe.
Representations and Aesthetics:
The lighting on the women in the film is much softer and smoother than that on the man, which is harder and outs them in shadow, gibing them more gruff or weathered faces. The women, by contrast, are presented as much smoother and fairer, making them appear fragile and elegant, whereas the men seem tough and masculine.
Auteur:
Ricks face is lit to bring our attention to him, as well as the dark contrast between his bright, pristine suit and the dark, empty corner of the cafe he sits in. The darkness of the shot also presents him as gruff, secretive and reclusive, even mysterious. This contrast how the women are presented in the film, as beautiful, elegant and delicate.
This scene begins with a restaurant goer being pickpocketed by an unassuming foreigner, who ironically warns him of there being “vultures everywhere” in Casablanca, further showing the lawlessness of the location. The scene then introduces us to the main antagonist, a Nazi officer, who arrives via plane in Casablanca. He is greeted by the French Chief of Police, who informs him, and the audience, through exposition, that the murderer of the two German Couriers with important exit documents will be arrested at Rick’s cafe later that evening.
Key Elements:
Cinematography –
The opening shot of this sequence is a wide shot in deep focus to make the background, and the lavish, expansive set, more visible to the audience, further boasting and utilising the Warner Bros. Set design and immersing the audience in the environment. The actors are blocked perfectly to be in frame, no one in the way of the camera view of another, so that all of them can be seen talking, but also so that the events they are reacting to in the background contextualise their dialogue and can be witnessed by the audience as they hear the dialogue. We cut to more shots of the usual suspects being herded into the police station to further contextualise their conversation. We then cut back to a two shot of the pickpocket explaining the nature of Casablanca to the unsuspecting victim. As the pickpocket stand up to speak to the lady, the camera pedestals up and dolly’s back to become a three shot, once again making everyone in the conversation visible to the audience without making unnecessary or distracting cuts. This is also true when the victim stands, so that he is still in frame, and the waiter that walks on screen is stood in the exact spot where he is visible stood between the man and the woman.
The shot of the plane landing is framed by an archway, Warner Bros. Still making the most of their set as this exotic arch farmers a plane landing and an imposing, foreign lighthouse in the background, focusing our attention, alongside the precise blocking of the guards to bring our eyes to the landing plane and the lighthouse beyond it. As is typical of classical Hollywood style, this long shot cuts to a wide shot of the plane to make the change in location more seamless. This frame is also composed by the blocking of the extras to bring our attention to the planes door, where the villain is exiting, as the extras are lined up and facing said door. This then cuts to a close up of the main Nazi officer approaching a lesser officer, and then an over the shoulder shot reveals the official much closer to the camera to signify his importance, as-well as his height over the other officers. The exact same thing happens to show the French Chief of Police’s importance, an over the shoulder shot showing his importance to the plot, but he is much shorter than the Nazi officer, showing a power dynamic. We then cut to a wide shot that tracks the movement of the characters, crabbing, to avoid making cuts. A close up two shot shows the two men talking, then a cut to a three shot shows the third officers input, stating there until the end of the sequence.
Editing –
Regular shot reverse shots between the crowds of people looking hopefully up and the plane coming in to land show their desire to escape Casablanca, and the rarity of a plane in the air in the city. Fade cuts make the editing more seamless as fast the scene feel like one larger take, as seen when the plane lands and the transition follows its movement to cut to the framed shot of the airfield.
Sound –
The diegetic sound of the plane landing rises in the sound mix when the camera is nearer to it, immersing the audience, and lowers so that we can hear the peoples dialogue.
Mise-En-Scen –
The architecture is exotic and Eastern, immersing the audience in this new and foreign, interesting environment and further contextualising the story in every new shot, another example of efficiency of storytelling.
Performance –
The actors all play stereotypical caricatures of their characters ethnicity. The English man is pompous and patronising, the French man fats speaking and amusing, the German upright and smug, the Italian rapidly moving and speaking with exaggerated hand gestures.
Context:
The film makes deliberate efforts to expose its large and impressive sets, with exotic architecture, large amounts of extras, deep focus, long shots and precise actor blocking to draw the audiences attention to the most impressive, life-like parts of the environment, immersing and impressing them, making most value out of these large and expensive sets.
Jack Warner wanted this film to be a pro-interventionist piece of media, so likely made sure that the Nazis were presented as emotionless, greedy and bland villains. The director, Michael Curtiz, also likely affected their presentation, as he was Hungarian himself and usually presented beaten down characters against larger, more imposing powers, here, Nazi Germany.
Representation and Aesthetics:
The men at the restaurant are stereotypes of their nationalist it’s, the Englishman being a gullible, naive and unassuming victim, the French man being a sly, nimble and smart trickster.
The Nazi officers in this scene are caricatures of the typical American perception of them at the time. Their uniforms are neat and straight, and they move stiffly, almost robotically, displaying an obsession with efficiency and authority. On the other hand, the French Chief of Police seems overly optimistic and care free. A comedic moment is also made out of the stereotypically needy Italian officer desperately trying to gain the attention of the Nazi officer, who almost completely ignores him, causing the Italian man to become confrontational with other officers, speaking fast and making exaggerated hand gestures.
Auteur:
The city in the background of this shot is actually a matte painting, as the film was shot in a Hollywood studio with recreated sets. This long shot was done to further immerse the audience in the exotic location and contextualise the story and the scene this moment in taking place in.
This sequence introduced the audience to the film. It begins with the Warner Bros. Logo and Jack Warner is immediately accredited. A map of Africa and exotic music lays the tone of the films location, and the French Anthem introduces the theme of patriotism. A narrator explains the nature of the situation in Europe, and why/how people are travelling to Casablanca. We then cut to a French officer e positioning and explaining why people need to rounded up and questioned. The film then cuts to this, and shows the busy streets and corrupt policing of the city. This is further shown by a man who is shot down by the police.
Key Elements:
Cinematography –
The scene begins with a map of Africa to set the film in reality and establish its location. We then cut to a spinning globe to visualise further where the story is taking place, and an animated line displays where/how the migrants are travelling to contextualise the story for the audience.
The lavish, expansive set is shown off through a rooftop shot which then tilts drops to become a street view, which is wide and shows of the environment. As the police cars drive though the streets, the camera pans to track their movement and show off even more of the set, making it seem even more real.
Editing –
As the map shows the journey and destination of the refugees, actual war-time footage is overlayed to root the film further in reality. Cross fades throughout the sequence made the transitions seamless, typical of the classical Hollywood style popularised at the time, and put one transition into another, giving the sequence a grand and overarching feel. The sequence of the usual suspects being rounded up is rapidly edited to show the chaos/urgency of the moment and the brutality of the police. As is typical of the classical Hollywood style, the whole sequence is done through continuity editing, and everything shown is in service to the story, even the pickpocket scene, showing how lawless the city is. This efficiency of storytelling is also seen in the instance where a man is asked for his papers by the police. This singular moment is representative of all the suspects being rounded up. This man is not a character, merely a plot device used to represent the police brutality against the struggling refugees trying, desperately, to get out of Casablanca.
As the police officers search the man, a sudden rise in the composed score and a focus in on his papers show that he was for French freedom from Germany. This then cross fades to a shot of the French national motto displayed above the palace of justice, the juxtaposition of shots acting as symbolism of the injustice displayed by the police in Casablanca, and the tragedy of the situation.
Mise-En-Scene –
The city of Casablanca is bustling and filled to the brim with activity. Different styles of outfits and exotic animals and architecture cement the location and immerse the audience in the films setting.
Sound –
The music played in the title sequence by Max Steiner has an African/Eastern, exotic tone to it, bringing the audience into the location. The rousing French National Anthem then plays to establish the theme of patriotism and freedom.
In the city, the sound mix is dominated by the diegetic sounds of the shouting and moving people of the city. The sound of the police officer raises in the mix so that the audience can hear the exposition, and the sound mix after is filled with loud sirens, shouting and running to show the chaotic and fast-paced sequence in which the usual suspects are rounded up and harassed by the police.
Performance –
The police officer receiving a telegram sets up the plot in 3 sentences through exposition. The classical Hollywood style was about efficiency of storytelling, showing the plot through as few cuts or lines of dialogue as possible. This is evident in the editing, writing and cinematography here.
Context:
Casablanca, in the film, is not the real place, rather made as an expansive prop set in the Warner Bros. studio in Hollywood. The film shows off this location through wide shots of the streets, where large numbers of extras and extreme attention to detail are used to create this exotic and foreign environment, the studio essentially boasting its lavish set design. In one shot the film shows everything needed to contextualise the film in the heaving, crowded and busy streets of the city, with a mix of Europeans, Africans, Americans, etc.
The narrators language is biased and manipulative, describing how “torturous” the journey was, and how eyes turned “hopefully, or desperately” to the west. This is because the Warner Bros. Head/executive producer Jack Warner was an interventionist who wanted for the film to persuade the American people of the threat posed by the Nazis and the reasons to become involved in the war in Europe. The general feeling of Americans towards France at the time were that they were noble struggling victims, bullied by a stronger, more aggressive power. The French are not at fault, and are trying to defend themselves. This is reflected in the patriotic score and the depictions of Europeans being pickpocketed or harassed by police in the opening sequence, or the narrators manipulative language which describes the refugees as hopeful, struggling victims. This is because of how Americans viewed the French at the time, but also because of Jack Warner’s desire to make a film in favour of joining the war in Europe, to defend the victimised French and defeat the ruthless Germans.
The film boasts its lavish set design, impressive extra count and cast as Warner Bros. Was rivalling the other 4 big film studios in Hollywood at the time the film was made, so made efforts to increase the exoticism, scale, grandeur and glamorous image of their films.
As the man is show down by the police, there is no sign at all of the gun shot wound, as the studio was regulated by the Hays code, further making the film a product of the time in which it was made.
Representation and Aesthetic:
The characters in the film are relative stereotypes of the ethnicities they belong to. For example, the poor accents are a result of the fact that this film was not shot on location, rather in a studio back in Hollywood. Their cartoon-like personality’s are done to show the cultural mixing pot that is Casablanca, contextualising the film.
Autership:
Jack Warner is immediately credited in the opening title sequence, showing that he had a large hand in the production of the film. He green-lit the idea and had it wheeled into production as he wanted to create a film to persuade the American people of the country’s responsibility to become involved in the war in Europe. The actors and the composer and the director are also credited in a large font, showing that the film was a collaboration of different talents, further emphasised by the non-diegetic composed score rising in tone and pitch as the composer is credited.
The camera dolly’s in to focus the audiences attention on the journey the refugees have travelled, and the location the film is set in, thereby contextualising the story of the film.
Jack Leonard Warner was a businessman who worked alongside his brothers in the film industry in 1910. In 1917 he moved to L.A to open a film exchange and profit from the growing market there. He and his brother Sam struggled to make largely profitable or profitable films until 1927 (by which time Paramount, Universal and First National studios were Hollywood’s “Big Three”), when Sam also died from pneumonia. The Jazz Singer (1927, Alan Crosland) was the company’s first successful film, bringing in $3 million in profits despite only $500,000 being invested into it. It was also the first ever feature length “talky” film, as the other studios had been reluctant to incorporate sound in their films. Grieving at the loss of his brother, Jack ran the studio strictly, and gained the dislike of many of his employees. He also kept costs for film production low, and survived through the Great Depression relatively undamaged. He would often cast for the films, and in 1930 hired Joan Blondell, Frank McHugh and James Cagney, who went on to make 38 films with the studio.
Warner took credit ofr Casablanca (Michael Curtiz, 1942) by accepting the Oscar it received instead of the films producer Hal B. Wallis in 1943. During WW2, Warner Bros. Was one of the only studios to openly criticise the Nazis, whereas other did not for fear of losing a market in Europe. This culminated in his influence on Casablanca, which we wanted to be made to persuade the American public to be in support of joining the war in Europe. Rick is representative of America, at first reluctant to get involved but eventually dragged in because he knows that it is the right thing to do. It is lit, for example, to make Rick seem noble and Ilsa seem vulnerable. It is essentially a piece of propaganda. Around this period, he also fired many screenwriters, destroying their careers, for harbouring suspected communist sympathises. Despite being one of the first studios to introduce sound, Warner resisted the rise of TV in the post war era, tying to introduce things like 3-D films. These soon lost popularity, and Warner’s contempt for the new medium was made worse by TV actors increased freedom over film actors, and Warner perceived them as being ungrateful. Warner was said to be a ruthless business mogul and a decisive business man, also recognised amongst his employees for being unforgiving and cruel. He died in 1978 from heart inflammation.
Hal B. Wallis:
Hal B. Wallis joined the Warner Bros. production department in 1923, and eventually joined the production branch of the company and become the head of production. Over his 50 year career, he would produce over 400 feature length movies. He won the Academy Award for Best Picture in March 1944 for Casablanca, but the award was taken by Jack L. Warner who rushed on stage to take it instead. This caused Wallis to leave Warner Bros the next month. He went on to work as an independent worker for some time and gaining success, before eventually joining Universal Pictures. He received 16 academy award producer nominations, was twice honoured in their memorial award, nominated for 7 Golden Globe awards, winning awards for best picture twice, and in 1975 won the Golden Globe award for lifetime achievement in motion pictures. Wallis, like Warner, was a Republican in favour of preserving American values and ideals. Who supported Eisenhower’s election in 1952.
Michael Curtiz:
Michael Curtiz made a number of film in Europe, being Hungarian himself, before moving to America where he went on to work for Warner Bros. His sister, step-bother and their children were killed in Auschwitz after he left Europe. He considered the ‘human-side’ of films the most important aspect, alongside a plot that developed as the film went on. His characters often dealt with social issues like injustice, oppression exile. He would always place emphasis on the struggle of the beaten down and repressed members of society against the higher-ups and powerful, even when working across several different genres, and this is evident in Casablanca. He also claimed that each director’s “work is reflection of himself”.
Arthur Edeson:
Edeson utilised the skills he head learned from still and portrait photography for Casablanca. He would make modelling suggestions and be more careful in his placement of shadows, etc, whereas most lighting at the time was flat lighting. His methods produced a more soft, portrait like-image in the films he made.
Max Steiner:
Max Steiner was an influential and respected composer who found success in the film noir genre in particular. He was an auteur in his own right, using music to change or emphasise the tone or pace of a scene, the characters emotions or how they are presented to the audience, as is seen in Casablanca. He followed his own instincts, so if he saw a scene that he felt did not portray, for example, the emotion of a character well enough, he would add music to accompany it and highlight that characters emotions or thought process to the audience nice more, making the moment more impactful and meaningful to them. He would subordinate himself to the music and know when to start and stop, limiting himself on the extent he would show off his score, as he felt that if a composer showed off too much it would subtract from the emotion and meaning of a film. “If you get too decorative, you lose your appeal to the emotions. My theory is that the music should be felt rather than heard.” Although Steiner at first did not like the usage log As Time Goes By in Casablanca, Ingrid Bergman had cut her hair short for another film and so could not re-shoot the scenes with it in. Therefore, he embraced the song and centred his score around it, making it the main/centre score.
Due to the size and influence of Hollywood as a centre for the American film industry in the 1930s, many artists were taking inspiration and ideas from one another as to how a film should be made. Experiments were made in camera movements, cinematography, mise-en-scen, etc. The result was the basis for all narrative cinema made today, many films of interest being ones that deviate from this structure, which is known as the Classical Hollywood Style.
The Classical Hollywood Style:
The classical Hollywood style refers to the widely used structure of filmmaking that rose in 1930s Hollywood. This structure paid all focus on production to the stars and the narrative of a film, so works to keep the audiences attention on these. Directors made their films to be so engaging and immersive for the audiences that saw it that they would not even notice the structural aspects of the film, such as editing, fake sets, actors, etc.
An example of how this was done is through editing. A very common way of shooting a scene would be to have a long shot of two characters, establishing their positions and distance to each each other. Then, a wide shot showing the two characters closer to the camera, bringing the audience further into the dialogue, which the directors wanted the audience to pay attention to. Then a close up would shot one character alone talking to show their face, and then an over the shoulder shot looking from behind them at the other person, and then the scene would shot-reverse-shot between over the shoulder shots to seamlessly bring the audience into the moment and the dialogue without distracting them with visuals, abrupt edits, etc. Everything centred around the story.
The stars were also a focal point for the filmmakers. For example, the cinematographers were in charge of making the actresses look glamorous and beautiful, and the villains held in shadow and dark areas. This is an example of how the director would direct the audiences attention, and inform them how to feel. This would also be done through emotional music. Melodramatic acting, exotic and expansive sets made in the studios, 3 act structures, linear narratives and conventional characters are also staples of the classical Hollywood style.
Long shots were used to immerse the audience and reveal lots of information, such as the layout of an environment, without making many cuts to potentially ruin immersion in the story. POV shots also grew in usage in this time period, effective for showing a character as they were and immersing the audience in the characters emotions and thought process in that moment. It tells them exactly how that character feels int hat moment we see it from their perspectives. Parallel editing done through cross cutting became popular to involve the audience in the plot further and raise the tension, thereby gaining their undivided attention.
In the 1930s and early 1940s, the studio system held almost complete control over the film industry. Because of their system of vertical integration, by 1945 they owned 17% of all theatres in America, and held exclusive partnerships with 45%, so 62% of all theatres in America could only show films by the studio they were owned by or partnered with. For this reason, it was impossible for foreign or independent, indie films to be shown anywhere. The studios, therefore, held an unfair oligopoly on the industry, dominating all productions that U.S audiences saw. For this reason, filmmakers complained to the U.S department of justice, which claimed that this was an illegal situation, so it was brought to court in 1938.
The 1938 trial:
As Paramount was the biggest studio at the time, it was the main defendant, with the other big 5 and little 3 studios as co-defendants. The case was settled in 1940, with the settlement that by the end of 1943 the studios could continue operating as they did currently, but they would have to follow 4 directives if the case was not to be revisited. These were, 1.
1. They could no longer couple larger films with B-Movies and force theatres to do so, i.e they couldn’t block buck short films along with their longer films.
2. They could continue to do this when allowed by a theatre, but could show no more than 5 of their films at a time. Therefore, they couldn’t force the theatres to show only their films, holding a monopoly on what was shown to the audiences.
3. “Blind-buying” was made illegal. This was where the studios would refuse to tell the theatres what they were being paid to show, so now the theatres could be shown the film and say whether or not they wanted to show it.
4. There had to be a voluntary nation wide administration board to make sure these things happened.
The studios completely ignored these directives and continued on as they had before the case. For this reason, when the case was reviewed, it was sent to the Supreme Court in 1948.
The 1948 Trial:
The verdict reached in this trial went entirely against the studios. It was made illegal in the U.S for film studios to own film theatres. This forced the studios to sell all of their theatres in a certain amount of time, and sent the entire studio system crashing down. This was made worse by the simultaneous suburbanisation away from cities so that more audiences lived further away from cinemas, and the rise of affordable TV, making it so that people could watch film from home. This led to studio companies going bankrupt, being bought and sold, losing money, etc. The Golden Age of Hollywood was over, ended by a sudden and severe decline.
In the long term, this had a positive effect. The studios were forced to be more competitive, This ushered in a ‘new age of Hollywood’ in which there was opportunity for foreign films to be shown, indie films and indie filmmakers to gain traction, and more experimental, artistic work not made so much for profit as for artistic value to be shown to American audiences.
In the U.S filmmaking was viewed as a business. Groups formed organisations and competed with each other to make more money from their film productions to invest into the next ones. Because of this spirit of entrepreneurship, in the 1920s a group of film studios were formed to produce, promote and distribute quality films and collect the profits for them to make the next one even more attractive to audiences. 5 main studios grew to such a significant extent that they owned most of the productions, cinemas, actors, etc. These were MGM, Paramount, Fox Film Corporation, Warner Bros. And RKO. Each one of these held a unique selling point that was specific to them as a studio. For example, Warner Bros. Made dark, gritty crime films, whereas Paramount was known for light entertainment and comedy. MGM produced bright, glitzy and glamorous pictures, RKO produced horror and film noir movies. There were also 3 smaller studios, United Artists, Columbia Pictures, and Universal Pictures.
These studios were vertically integrated, so that they owned every stage of the production process. From the initial birth of an idea to its final showing in cinemas, the film was owned entirely by a single studio. The studios also owned the actors, directors, editors and everyone else involved in the production process through contracts. After the studio system rose, the star system did.
The Star System: and unbreakable contracts:
The fame, looks, personality and prestige of certain actors became the main selling point for a film, for example Humphrey Bogart was recognisable as playing hardened, heroic figures, and Marilyn Monroe was distinct for her beauty and charm. The studios recognised their profitability, and competed fiercely to employ actors through contracts to make as much money through as many films as them as possible. Though the actors were paid well, they were kept bound to work under a single studio through ‘unbreakable contracts’. They had to work in a certain amount of films, and to keep the actors under their payroll, the studios would often not make any more films with them to avoid them from escaping these contracts.
The fall of the Studio System:
When the Great Depression struck in the 1940s, the big 5 studios were hit hard, RKO eventually collapsing, while the others were bought and sold between bigger companies. The 3 other, smaller film studios prevalent in the ‘Golden Age of Hollywood’ survived this crash through various methods. Universal was located outside of Hollywood, and adapted by changing to producing Blockbusters instead in a gamble to make more money. United Artists was made to give better deals for the artists involved alongside the studio, and Columbia were not vertically integrated, choosing instead to produce ‘B movies’ which they sold to the bigger studios to be screened in their cinemas to accompany the larger productions. They were also one of the first studios to embrace TV in the 1950’s and 1960’s, selling their own studios in 1972.
Casablanca (Michael Curtiz, 1942) is one of the most influential and popular films ever made. It was directed by Michael Curtiz and produced by Warner Bros. Studios. It epitomises the glamour and style of filmmaking in the golden age of Hollywood, starring a powerful cast, extensive sets, romantic dialogue and an engaging story. Many of its lines have become cemented in film history. “Here’s looking at you, kid.”, “We’ll always have Paris.”, and “This could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship.” Are all iconic lines from the film.
Synopsis:
Context for the story:
The story takes place in Casablanca, a city by in Morocco where European refugees seeking escape from the Nazis wait for transit to Lisbon, and from there, America. Corrupt police govern the city and attempt to impress the Nazi officers visiting by preventing important officials being pursued by the Nazis from gaining passage to America.
The story:
The protagonist is Rick Blaine (Humphrey Bogart) who runs a cafe in the city after fleeing from Paris to escape Nazi persecution, which sports a diverse cast of characters from all corners of the world, most waiting a seemingly endless wait for passage to America. He is a pessimistic, selfish character who mostly keeps to himself. He claims to care for no one other than himself, but this is contested by some of his co-workers, who point out his past assisting revolutionary groups, and his tendency to turn a blind eye to the illegal activity in his cafe helping refugees flee to Lisbon. Later in the film, he even helps a man fleeing Nazi pursuit cheat at roulette so that he can gain enough money to gain a flight to Lisbon, which, much to his dismay, gains the admiration and respect of his employees.
His world is thrown into chaos when a highly elusive and important revolutionary leader Victor Lazlo (Paul Henried) arrives in Casablanca evading Nazi capture, with him his wife and Rick’s ex lover from Paris Ilsa Lund (Ingrid Bergman) who seek letters of transit which Rick has possession of. A flashback reveals that Rick and Ilsa were passionately in love in Paris, and planned to run away together as Rick was to be arrested by the Nazis. Ilsa agrees to this plan, but on the day it was to happen, she left a note for Rick to explain that she could not come. Rick then fled to Casablanca, where he opened a cafe and became a selfish, pessimistic and isolated man. Ilsa begs Rick for the letters, who refuses to aid them for abandoning him in Paris.
Ilsa reveals that she in fact believed Lazlo to be dead in a concentration camp and was lonely in Paris, and while she loves Lazlo she also dearly loves Rick, which changes his mind, and so he hands over the letters. Rick’s claim that he cares for no one other than himself and his facade of a bleak lack of morality are put into question when Ilsa begs him for the letters, and he eventually consents, pulling off a daring plan to get her and Lazlo to America. His corrupt friend and chief of police captain Louis (Claude Rains) at first is forced at gunpoint by Rick to help him, but betrays his friend by informing a Nazi official of the plot. However, when the official arrives, Rick shoots him, and Louis covers for him by telling his men to search elsewhere. This redemption of character is also seen in how Louis throws a bottle from Vichy France into a bin, symbolising his detachment from being a corrupt, nazi puppet official. By giving the letters of transit to Lazlo and Ilsa, Rick makes a noble sacrifice to help the couple escape, leaving himself in danger of arrest in Casablanca. He and Louis escape Casablanca and Nazi pursuit together, walking off into the horizon, a happy, if bittersweet ending, as Rick will likely never see Isla again. However, he has redeemed himself, as now he has openly and actively done a good deed for someone in need of help, without being embarrassed of it.
Techniques:
The film has a linear narrative, only once using a flashback to explain how significant and important Ilsa’s love was to Rick, back when they both lived in Paris. The film uses a composed, non-diegetic score, the most notable track being As Time Goes By, sang by a character in the film, which is used to create romantic moments between Rick and Ilsa, who share fond memories over the song, adding emotion to those scenes, and the the track itself is romantic, making these moments more romantic. The editing is mostly made up of hard-cuts with occasional fade-cuts. The film is also in black and white, so the lighting and composition are focused on heavily. Characters are often framed alone in close-ups, and encompassing wide-shots are used to display environments, such as Rick’s cafe, to the audience, and characters of significance are placed in the centre and forefront of frame to bring our attention to them.
Personally, I enjoyed the scenes in the cafe most. The lighting gave a clean, cosy atmosphere to the building, and the bustling, multicultural atmosphere made the area feel alive and bursting with character, in contrast with Rick’s personality. I also enjoyed the flashback sequences showing the relationship between Rick and Ilsa in Paris, which felt genuine and real, making the audience more attached to them and their relationship.
A few weeks ago I received feedback on the rough-cut of my short film. I was told that it was shot well and edited smoothly, but the plot was very confusing and complicated, and that I should work to make it more understandable to the audience.
I took this in, and went back to editing. I added narration in key parts of the film where the situation would need to be contextualised, giving the protagonist an inner-monologue to explain huis thoughts and what was happening in the story to the audience. I also completely re-arranged the plot, so that it was still non-linear, but was told in a way that was less confusing. The film now goes from present to future and back again, rather than future to past to future to past, which is much more hard to follow for people who have not read the script or made the story.
Upon a second screening, I received much more positive feedback, being told that it was much more understandable now, and was how a short film should be re-edited to be improved. I am much happier with this result, and my coursework is near finished, as I plan now to polish the sound design and fix any issues with it, and maybe add some non-diegetic, compiled music for the start of the film to create a more ambient, less silent setting.
The “Golden Age of Hollywood” began in the late 1920s as silent films centred around comedy and romance and action served as popular escapism for audiences living through the Great Depression. As theatres closed, cinemas took over, and studio systems were created to profit off what was becoming a very popular, commercial source of entertainment as it advanced through colour, sound, etc.
5 main studios arose and dominated the industry, MGM, Paramount, Fox, Warner Bros and RKO. These studios were vertically integrated, so owned every stage of the production process and employed everyone involved in it. They contracted the editors, writers, directors and stars, owned the cinemas, cameras, etc. This led to the rise of the ‘star system’ alongside the ‘studio system’. Similarly to the studios, these stars became extremely wealthy and powerful, many driving a films entire box office success. February 5, 1919, some of these influential stars unionised and formed Artists United, and the stars who formed it were Charlie Chaplin, D.W Griffith, Marie Pickford and Douglas Fairbanks. It served as a major investor in and distributor of independently produced films in the U.S.
The Art Deco aesthetic rose to popularity in Hollywood, and the industry was monopolised by the extremely powerful and influential film studios. Actors were fought over by studios be be contracted, as they could make or break a movies box office success.
Component 1a covers the period of 1930-1990, focusing on Hollywood and it’s “Golden Age”, and how this evolved throughout the century. We will be looking at a film made in the height of Hollywood success, Casablanca (Michael Curtis, 1942) and Bonnie and Clyde (Arthur Penn, 1967). The specialist study areas are auteur theory and contexts.
“Experimental film is often the result of an auteur challenging established conventions with fresh ideas.” With reference to your chosen film option, how far do you agree with this statement?
Planning:
Intro: I agree with the statement large extent. Make reference to the concept of Auteurship and explain how Tarantino is one, making reference to Pulp Fiction,
Explain how Tarantino is an auteur through his subversion of convention, making specific reference to sequences in Pulp Fiction. Describe how the film experimental and LTQ!
Explain why he is an auteur through his filmography motifs and reoccurring experimentalism signature to his oeuvre.
Make reference to criticism of the auteur theory and show why experimental film is not always made by auteur, and can be a result of a directors wish to dismantle convention, but acknowledge the increasing influence of directors who create experimental film, e.g Nolan or Wes Anderson. Experimental or auteur for different reasons, i.e narrative or visuals, etc.
Conclusion: Link points together, explaining why Tarantino has created an experimental film through his Auteurship, but experimental film, while common among auteurs, is not specific to them.
Version 1:
I agree with this statement to a large extent as auteur directors will often strive for new and original films, and often achieve this through experimental methods of filmmaking. The auteur theory states that a director who exudes a specific style or aesthetic that is singular to them, making their work recognisable as having been made by that director, is an auteur.
Tarantino is considered an auteur director because of the nuanced way he subverts narrative convention in Pulp Fiction. The film is episodic, circular, and each plot arc plays out in a linear order within itself. Tarantino keeps the film interesting by frequently swapping audience perspectives and playing major events in the story out of order, keeping the story and plot out of sync for the entire film. The way that he plays around with established narrative form in an otherwise cliche genre setting makes the film experimental, and this experimenting with narrative has become a staple of Tarantino’s oeuvre. This can also be seen in his other film, Reservoir Dogs (Quentin Tarantino, 1992), where the events taking place in the present are often broken apart or interchanged with snippets of the events leading up to them. Therefore, experimental film is often the result of an auteur challenging established conventions with fresh ideas, and this is significant in Tarantino’s style as an auteur in creating nuanced narrative.
Tarantino is also experimental in his approach to other aspects of filmmaking. In Pulp Fiction, this can be seen in the dialogue. Conversations are often entirely centred around copious pop culture references, typically music and film of the 1970s that Tarantino himself appreciates, making it more distinct to him as a director. There is subtext to these seemingly pointless discussions, and crude language within them is another motif of his filmography that makes his films recognisable as having been made by him. Obscure, vintage soundtracks, shooting on film, subversion of genre cliches, here that is crime/thriller, extreme violence used for comedic effect are also reoccurring staples in his entire body of work that make him films instantly recognisable as a Tarantino film. This can be seen in Pulp Fiction in the conversation between Jules and Verne. They casually talk about TV and fast food for a long period of time before carrying out a hit in an apartment. This scene is very drawn out, uses entertaining yet seemingly unrelated dialogue, and climaxes in a bloody and violent death. Therefore, auteurs do often experiment with new and fresh approaches to established film conventions to make their films more distinct and specific to them. This can be seen in Wes Anderson, for example, whose oddly symmetrical visuals and dry humour and dialogue give his work an individuality in their experimentalism and a link to him as a director. Therefore, auteurs will often create experimental film through a desire to make nuanced, interesting films specific to their oeuvre.
However, I do not completely agree with this statement, as auteur theory has been criticised for placing too much emphasis on the director alone as the creator and executor of an artistic vision in a film. There are many people who work on a film, for example, the cinematography for Pulp Fiction was done by Andrzej Sekula, who would go on to do a number of Tarantino’s other films. Therefore, it can be argued that Tarantino alone did not create the experimentalism of Pulp Fiction, rather a group of people who each input their vision and skill. However, this can be argued against as Tarantino wrote the script for Pulp Fiction, and often with other auteur directors the crew of a film may input their own ideas, but ultimately they carry out and partly execute the artistic view of the director who oversees that the film executes their idea/vision correctly. Therefore, many auteur directors do execute their vision in their films accurately enough so that it is specific to them, and any experimental narrative, dialogue, or aspect of it can be attributed to them and their desire to create a nuanced and fresh subversion of an established convention. Therefore, I agree with this view to a large extent.
I agree with the view that Experimental film is often the result of an auteur challenging established conventions with fresh ideas to a large extent. While experimental film is not specific only to auteur directors, most auteur directors will create and execute fresh, innovative takes on film convention to make original and entertaining works that are recognisable as their due to an overarching style in their filmography, as seen with Quentin Tarantino, and this drive for originality and ingenuity often results in experimental approaches to filmmaking.
Quentin Tarantino is considered an auteur for his stylistic, signature aesthetic and approach to filmmaking. His films are all linked by reoccurring motifs and aspects that are distinctly recognisable to him ad a director. These include shooting in film, interesting and entertaining dialogue surrounding pop culture Tarantino himself likes, crude language and humour, extreme violence used for comedic effect, etc.
Quentin Tarantino is considered an auteur for the the motifs that can be recognised universally in his filmography. An identifiable feature of his work is snappy, entertaining dialogue, crude humour and language, riveting tension, extreme violence, pop culture references and classic/retro soundtracks. A scene that shows this clearly is the apartment scene in Pulp Fiction (Quentin Tarantino, 1994), where a long and unrelated conversation told through crude language on pop culture builds up to the hit, tension is built in the apartment through a lengthy soliloquy by the character Jules, further pop culture references are made, and the climax arrives as a bloody, violent moment that is done for comedic effect. Tarantino is considered an experimental auteur, as his films display a high level of filmmaking/technical competence but also use unique and innovative approaches to narrative, dialogue, violence, etc. This is another reason why his films are so signature and specific to him, and allow for the audience to instantly recognise a Tarantino film as a Tarantino film. His experimental approach also prevents his films from become so synonymous with the crime/thriller genre that his style is considered a convention of the genre. He plays around with convention, subverts audience expectations and uses nuanced techniques. He has not simply made innovations in the genre, he has created a style and approach within the genre that is specific to him.
He can be considered a post-modern auteur. He has created his own directorial style by copious reference to past (specifically 1960s and 1970s) obscure/grind-house film and music sub-culture, cementing that convention in his own films, re-contextualising into the norm, while experimenting with nuanced approaches to narrative, scriptwriting, etc. He does not change the art’s original message, rather shows how it was filtered through the audiences perspective.
Auteur: “An artist with a distinctive approach, usually a film director whose filmmaking control is so unbounded but personal that the director is likened to the “author” of the film, which thus manifests the directors unique style or thematic focus.”
The auteur theory began in the 1950s when Cahiers du Cinema began to hail certain directors as ‘auteur’ directors for having demonstrated particular artistic skill while working in a studio system. These early examples include Alfred Hitchcock and Orson Wells.
Auteur theory claims that the director holds complete creative control over the audio and visual aspects of the film, is more so the “author” than the writer of the screenplay. This is the concept of camera-pen. Fundamental elements such as camera placement, lighting, scene length, etc. convey the message of the film rather than the plot line. Supporters of the theory will also claim that the most cinematically successful films are those with an unmistakable sign of its director. Personal expression is key to being classed as an auteur, and an auteur director is more concerned with aesthetic/style and themes than structure and content, giving their films a signature flair. It may not have to be an artistic interpretation of the world, but rather an artistic vision or style specific to the director. A director can be considered an auteur for a distinct visual style, such as Wes Anderson, or for thematic interest, or or being considered an innovator in a specific genre, such as Ridley Scott, or experimenting with established conventions such as narrative, or another reason. Auteurship reinforces the ideal of individual perspective building upon conventions to build something new.
The theory has been criticised for not recognising the value and role of the various crew of a film or the social/cultural/production context or genre it was made in. It is more so the main vision of the director guiding the crew, but often the voice of the other people making the film can come through aswell as the directors. Many producers have been recognised for their own voice and vision influencing the voice. Scores, screenplays, etc. can be more recognisable, or combine to create the overall film, its style, etc. The author of the film can be more than just the director. Auteur theory is a policy. It is a theory used to identify, but is not a rule, the films quality does not depend on an authorial voice or who gave it that, but is used to understand whose personal creative voice influenced the film, even if the director is not the only factor in the films final image.
Quentin Tarantino’s signature style can be seen to have began in his lost film My Best Friends Birthday, which featured his comedic editing and use of volatile language and snappy dialogue. Tarantino’s career began with Harvey Keitel’s dedicated support to the Reservoir Dogs script, whose career had been diminishing. His name helped the film to be made, as other stars began to consider the project. Tarantino’s style seemed unconventional to more experienced members of the industry.
He was heavily criticised for leaving in a graphic torture scene in the film. It was pegged as a revelation at Cannes, and won at the Toronto Film Festival the prize for best film. It made $3 million in the USA, only shown in 26 theatres in the first week, and 10 in the UK, making £100,000 in the first weekend. It was considered the best directing be but since Citizen Kane.
Tarantino thinks in oeuvres (body of work), considering his films connected. He is eager to avoid creating lesser works that affect the overall quality of his oeuvre, believing that his filmography would be healthier if all his films were well-made.
His films are distinct in their use of fast and witty dialogue over seemingly pointless subjects, chaptered plots and story’s following 1970s crime thriller cliches that he puts his own spin on via unique characters, dialogue, soundtrack and nuanced use of extreme violence for comedic effect. Tarantino’s filmography is consistently highly-praised and many, if not most of his films are considered masterpieces. There are many aspects of Tarantino’s films that make them recognisable as being made by him, including extreme, often ridiculous violence, clever and nuanced use of dialogue, non-linear/interesting approaches to narrative, obscure 1970/80s compiled soundtracks, re-occurring actors and riveting plots told through unique structure and use of perspective/audience positioning. He often also includes crude language used casually in his dialogue and many pop-culture references, of which are very specific to him and his tase in pop-culture, e.g films, music, etc., which make his films individually more unique to him as a stand-alone director.
He includes an abundance of subtext to his dialogue, which makes his more fun to watch. He also creates and holds suspense over the course of long scenes. All of his films include scenes like this, some include many of them. He will do this often through dialogue with subtle and hidden meaning, even if on surface level it is over pleasantries and/or seemingly unrelated topics. He will give the audience implicit information and often create constantly building tension by bringing the scene closer to a climax or realisation, and continues the tension even after that realisation. The characters take their time and chat over normal, even realistic matters. They do not speak quickly or purposefully for long periods of time, instead Tarantino establishes their motivations and goals to create binary oppositions and set the possibility for a climax, thereby establishing tension and building it through subtle dialogue slowly but evidently building to that climax. These scenes also rarely involve music, instead long, drawn out silence to draw the audience inti the scene, alongside the dialogue with subtext.
His films have become highly recognised, respected, discussed and aspired to in the film industry. He is considered an independent auteur director, all of his films instantly identifiable to him and his body of work, different in each story but connected through signature features of his style of directing and his striving for consistent success in his oeuvre.
I recently began editing my short film. I shot the main proportion of clips on my phone, then uploaded them to my iPad. I then filmed the last section and uploaded them as-well. The filming process itself went well, I feel. The actors filled their roles well, there were no major issues with time-limits or equipment, although I do feel that I relied too much on my phone gimbal for stationary shots where I should have been using a tripod. Any focus or exposure problems were fixed through shooting with FilmMcPro, and the script/story board was stuck to throughout the process.
Although some footage is slightly shaky, I plan to fix this in post-production, and as of now I have compiled all clips into a very rough cut. I still need to record some voiceovers and collect some footage on my laptop to include in the film, but currently it is a complete, if an un-tidy, short film.
Me filming a dolly into an extreme close up during the first major film shoot.
“Explore how far your chosen film or films are experimental in challenging conventional approaches to narrative.”
Planning:
Introduction – Briefly explain some context, i.e traditional approaches to narrative (3 act structure, 3 types of narrative), and summarise how/how much Tarantino subverts these traditions.
Describe how Tarantino subverts audience expectations and orthodox narrative through a non-linear, episodic narrative through a jumbled plot, linking to Tzvetan Todorov’s 5 stage theory. Also how he follows the 3 types of narrative.
Describe his switching between different narrative viewpoints through characters, restricted and unrestricted, and audience positioning. Explain how he subverts Vladimir Propp’s theory on character types, and his unique use of dialogue.
Conclusion: Describe how Tarantino combines episodic, circular and linear narrative types, changes audience positioning and narrative viewpoints regularly, and subverts established film theories/tropes and the cliches he himself included deliberately in the film to challenge conventional approaches to film narrative.
Version 1:
Pulp Fiction is highly experimental in it’s approach to narrative. Narrative traditionally follows a three act structure with a linear plot. Tarantino creates a narrative that subverts conventions and regularly swaps viewpoints, abandoning common narrative form in favour of focus on dialogue and character.
Tarantino subverts audience expectations in Pulp Fiction by going against orthodox film narrative, described by Tzvetan Todorov as a five stage process, involving the equilibrium, the disruption, recognition and resolution. Pulp Fiction is broken up into three distinct chapters which are played out of linear sequence, epilogued and prologued by a scene in a diner. This makes the plot episodic, circular, and linear, as each story plays out in chronological order in itself. The plot is completely separate to the story, leading to a highly experimental and disrupted narrative. The audience does not witness the plot playing out in order of the events occurring, for example, the diner sequence is shown at the beginning and the end of the film, but in the story occurs somewhere near the start of events, and the final scene chronologically int he story is shown around halfway through through the film’s plot. Tarantino therefore subverts audience expectations by fragmenting the plot and leaving the viewer to create the story in their own mind after seeing the film. He follows the three most common narrative types, and uses multiple devices such as inter-title cards and chaptering to create a highly irregular narrative that combines different conventional forms to subvert traditional narrative theory and create an experimental narrative in Pulp Fiction.
Tarantino also challenges conventional approaches to narrative through his frequent switching between narrative viewpoints. For example, at the start of the film the audience is positioned to empathise and care for the two diner robbers. At the end of the film, we are positioned to care about Jules and his story, and in that scene, despite what we know about them, the robbers are the antagonists with a binary opposition to Jules, who is in that scene our protagonist. He also uses restricted and unrestricted narrative viewpoints, such as when we do not know about the armed man in the apartment bathroom whilst the hit is happening, but later on we are aware of the fact, whereas Jules and Vincent are not. Every different chapter the narrative viewpoint shifts between characters, which stops the audience from seeing any particular person as the main character or villain, subverting Vladimir Propp’s theory on character type, stating that there are seven main character types in all stories, such as the hero, villain, and false hero.
Tarantino also does this by making the characters immoral and hard to look up to, so no character is the hero, villain, etc. Tarantino also places a great amount of emphasis on the dialogue in the film. The characters spend large amounts of time discussing irrelevant topics, such as how Vince and Julie’s spend as much time talking about fast food and foot massages leading up to the hit in the apartment as they spend carrying out the hit itself. The audience would not realise this as the dialogue, despite going against convention buy being so seemingly pointless, flows so well and immerses the viewer in what is being said. We are drawn in by these conversations that do not progress the plot in any way, only revealing binary oppositions, such as Vince’s belief that foot massages are inappropriate, explaining his later reluctance to take Mia on a date, or Butch’s dedication to his father’s watch. These oppositions, established by Claude Levi Strauss, provide the film with underlying tensions that immerse the audience. Tarantino subverts this theory by revealing the binary oppositions through seemingly pointless conversations about apparently unrelated topics, rather than through character actions or inner-monologue. The dialogue is flowing and entertaining to listen to, providing the film with a rhythm that flows smoothly to move the audience between major events, which are more memorable than the events themselves. Tarantino challenges conventional approaches to narrative through original, nuanced and experimental dialogue and cliche characters that are fleshed out and developed through the subtly written dialogue, script, and shifting narrative viewpoints.
Pulp Fiction is highly experimental in challenging conventional approaches to narrative. Tarantino utilises a chaptered, non-linear plot that goes against traditional narrative convention to encourage the audience to order the story themselves, forcing viewer participation and subverting Todorov’s established theory on five stage theory. He also swaps audience positioning to show characters from different perspectives, adding a layer of depth to the film through an experimental methodology. He incorporates fresh and original dialogue that does not progress the story but immerses the audience by being so casual and calm, and fleshes out the cliche characters through binary oppositions and subtle meanings between the lines. The characters themselves go against convention, despite being cliches themselves, as they are realised and developed through the dialogue and the audiences shifting feelings towards them as Tarantino changes the narrative and audience positioning.
Tarantino utilises dialogue to a high extent in his films, and it is considered a staple aspect of his films. He makes the dialogue enjoyable and engaging for the audience through reference to pop culture, and long conversations often revolve entirely around trivial or non-important topics, which makes it relatable and enjoyable for the audience to listen to. Ordinary conversations between friends are easy and entertaining to pay attention to, especially when between characters such as Jewels and Vincent, hit et that you wouldn’t usually expect to be talking do jovially about a “royale with cheese”.The dialogue provides a flowing pace to the film, as seen in how the drive leading up to the murder in the apartment is as long as the scene in the apartment, but the audience does not realise this while watching either scene since the dialogue in the car flows so easily. It also makes the character archetypes interesting, fleshing out blatantly cliche characters through relatable and unique dialogue over mundane focal points (such as the French equivalent of American fast food names) that is characteristic of Tarantino.
Narrative Viewpoint:
“The character with whom the audience is manipulated to emphasise or sympathise at any oven point in the film.” Tarantino also utilises this in an interesting and nuanced way, as he shifts the perspective between characters every new chapter. At first we are interested in the diner robber’s story, then we empathise with Vincent due to his precarious situation, then we are enthralled by Butch’s risky quest for the gold watch (in which Vincent and Wallace become the antagonists) then we understand Jewel’s sudden moral awakening, and from that perspective Vincent seems like a vain idiot to us and the diner robbers are the antagonists of the scene. This prevents the audience from becoming too attached with any one character, but simultaneously keeps us engaged and attached to all of them.
Character Motivations:
This is the driving force behind the character’s choices and actions. Motivations are fundamental to the audiences understanding of and engagement with the meaning of films. Tarantino’s character motivations are facilitated through his dialogue and so is the films narrative drive. This can be seen in how Vincent’s seemingly pointless defensiveness about the inappropriateness of foot massages eludes to his later apprehensiveness of taking Mia out and sets up his personality, therefore why he reacts to her overdose in the way that he does. It is also done, more explicitly, in Christopher Walken’s explanation of the origins of Butch’s fathers’ gold watch, which sets up why he would later go to such great lengths to retrieve it.
Cause and Effect:
The cause is an event or action and its consequences , which is the effect. All films are constructed around this simple concept, and in Pulp Fiction this can be seen in Vincent’s desperateness to save her with Mia due to the story of the man killed by her husband because he gave her a foot massage. Vividly created characters make cause and effect more esoteric, and creates character nuance and depth.
Chronological Flow:
“The arrangement of things following one after another in time.” Pulp Fiction only flows chronologically in throughout the individual sequences in the film, which contrasts how the film as a whole is not arranged in chronological sequence.
Pacing:
“The rhythm at which the plot unfolds.” Tarantino deliberately paces his films in a nuanced way that goes against film tradition, subverting audience expectations and engaging them through that subversion. Seemingly insignificant scenes take up a lot of time, whereas scenes crucial to the story can start and end very quickly, as seen in the drive to the from the apartment where Martin is shot by Vincent very suddenly and offscreen, after which the scene ends abruptly, just after we see a long, drawn out conversation between Vincent and Jewels about divine intervention. It is also evident in the diner robbers’ long conversation about robbing coffee shops opposed to gas stations right before a sudden start and cut away from the actual robbery in the diner itself, which we only again return to at the end of the film.
Narrative is made up of 3 components. Story, plot and narrative. Story is what the audience internalises in their minds. It is everything that occurs in the film from start to end, including events that the audience infer. The plot is what happens in the film, what is shown, allowing the audience to construct the story in their heads. It can begin anywhere in the chain of events, and can lead backwards or forwards. Narrative is how perspective is shown, i.e how the information is conveyed by the film to the audience. The flow of information from a positioned viewpoint.
In Pulp Fiction (Quentin Tarantino, 1994) Tarantino uses the narrative to change the audiences understanding of events happening through changing perspectives. The characters, settings, story and key events are already familiar to the audience, as they are traditional, established crime thriller tropes/cliches. So, Tarantino constructs the narrative in an unfamiliar way, and therein lies the audiences enjoyment. Also, the fragmentation of the plot creates a sense of anticipation, because the audience knows what to expect, but don’t know when it will happen.
Tarantino also subverts the traditional 3 act structure which is a storytelling model dividing a story into 3 acts, the set up, confrontation, and resolution, in that order. In Pulp Fiction, each story, such as Vincent and Jewels’ arc, can be taken individually and told in a 3 act structure. E.g they travel to the apartment in act 1, the inciting incident, in act 2, the confrontation, they are attacked by one of the men and take a hostage, act 3 , the climax, they clean up a dead body and are confronted in the diner by the robbers. However, the film as a whole does not follow this structure, as it’s plot is so split up.
Tarantino also subverts audience expectations by following the 3 most common types of narrative simultaneously. The film follows a linear narrative (events play out in order from start to end) as each story plays out in a linear fashion by itself. It is circular (the narrative starts at the end and returns back to that point at the end of the film by going back in time) by showing the diner robbery at the start and end of the film. It is also episodic (the narrative has clearly separated sections, often broken up by a title, date, or usage of a narrator) as it uses inter titles to bring the film into new sections, such as “the Gold watch” or “the Bonnie situation”.
The film uses Prolepsis (edit to a later point in time) and analepsis (edit to an earlier point in time), and elipsis, which is where part of the story is emitted and later on learned of by the audience. Pulp Fiction deliberately hides things from the audience for them to learn later on, such as the diner robbers being in the same diner as Vincent and Jewels, or Vincent and Jewels entering the restaurant to see Wallace while Butch is there.
Tarantino also combines the 3 types of narrative viewpoint. It uses restricted (the audience only know as much as the protagonist, or character the film is following) such as when Vincent and Jewels are unaware of the man in the bathroom apartment, and at the time we, too, are unaware. We also see things from an unrestricted viewpoint (the audience sees aspects of the narrative the character it follows does not), like when Mia overdoses on heroin, thinking its cocaine, when we, the audience, know that it is heroin and cannot be sniffed as she does so. Tarantino mixes and switches between these as he sees fit.
He also uses different narrative devices in Pulp Fiction, such as title cards (the definition of pulp fiction at the start of the film establishing the well-known cliches of the film), intertitle cards, chattering that splits the film into 3 distinct chapters bookended by the diner robbery. Tarantino also utilises audience positioning in an interesting way. Vincent and Jewels are hired hitmen, Wallace is a murdering crime boss, Butch is a man who is willing to kill, lie and cheat for personal gain, Fabienne makes no moral judgement over it, Jimmy is happy to let gangsters into his house and dismember a body. All of the characters in the film are repugnant characters, and yet in the film we like them to various degrees.
So we are definitely positioned to enjoy being in the company in Vincent and Jewels who are charismatic, humorous or stylish. Lance is a scummy drug dealer, but is funny to listen to. We are being manipulated and positioned to sympathise with characters we wouldn’t normally. We are positioned to view the two men in the basement scene as horrible, but they are not much worse than the other characters, except in the context of the film they are the villains. The audience sympathies might shift throughout different points in the film, as in the beginning we follow the diner robbers, but later on they are from central characters to perifiral ones and we now care about Jewel’s reaction to the situation. We follow Vincent and Jewels, then Vincent and Mia, and the film shifts focus onto Mia, so the audience positioning is fluent and shifting.
There are academics who have invented narrative theories. Vladimir Propp studied Russian folklore and realised 7 character types throughout hundreds of stories. The hero, the villain, the princess, the donor, the dispatcher, the helper, the false hero. They are very vain characters. They will conform to these character types vein if those types are not present. In pulp fiction these traditional character types are not conformed into the script, as no character is one particular type, no villain, no single hero, etc. The second was that any story has up to 31 narrative functions. There are 31 things that can happen in a story. Any story will have some of them, but they will be in order. Pulp fiction is not in order, as the throes only works in linear stories/narratives. His theories are accepted as true, but Tarantino has created an interesting narrative as it doesn’t follow these audience expectations in terms of character types or narrative structure.
Propp
The second narrative theories is tzvetan todorov. Equilibrium theory. He said that any story has 5 stages. Those are equilibrium, disruption of equilibrium, recognition of disruption, resolution, new equilibrium. Tarantino does not give the audience this, what they expect.
Todorov
Roland Barthes invented the narrative codes theory. All stories have two narrative codes, which he identified as action and enigma codes. All stories have things that make audiences want to continue. Action codes are when a thing happens physically that you want to see what happens next, such as the shootout scene. Enigma codes are something that is intriguing that makes you want to know more. Such as the golden suitcase. Tarantino provides the codes, but does not necessarily give you what you want despite you seeing it. We never see what’s in the case. You are not given the satisfaction of the explanation. After Butch driving off, we don’t see what happens next to him.
Barthes
Claude Levi-Strauss invented binary opposition. Audience engagement is driven by tension between binary opposites. In any story there are tensions between opposites. The interplay drive the narrative and audience interest. It works for pulp fiction. There are binary oppositions, and that’s what creates interest.
The last thing that I did for my coursework was upload the vast majority of footage from the film from my phone, which I recorded it on, to my IPad. I have also put these clips into a half-done rough cut on LumaFusion, and am so far happy with how it looks. There are some audio and exposure issues and some moments where the camera shakes or the 180 degree rule is broken, but these can be fixed.
I plan next to organise a set filming date for the one, small scene that yet hasn’t been filmed. This should only take a short time to film. I also plan on adding some smaller, more abstract shots to the film, but these can be done by me alone and do not require much time either to film. I will then move these between my devices add all of them into the rough cut.
Pulp Fiction was written by Quentin Tarantino between 1992 and 1993, and was originally turned down by Tristar pictures for being ‘too demented.’, but was the fist film fully distributed by Miramax after co-chairman Harvey Weinstein saw it. It won the Palme d’Or at Cannes film festival in 1994, having been made with a budget of $8.5 million and eventually making a box office success of $213.9 million.
It is considered by critics as a touchstone of post modern film due to its entirely unique and unconventional narrative structure. It’s use of an A-List cast also brought the film much attention, regardless of the long-anticipated second film by the director, who had made notoriety after his 1992 crime thriller Reservoir dogs brought him into the mainstream.
Pulp Fiction is an experimental film, telling a conventional, cliche gangster story through a nuanced form of narrative. They film was also so influential due to Tarantino’s use of violence to ironically create humour and snappy and clever dialogue that does not add to the plot in any way, self-reflexive style, all which would come to represent Tarantino as an auteur director. The film homages more classic, indie cinema, and is considered his masterpiece particularly for its screenplay.
Tarantino created a riveting and enthralling movie by maintaining an escalating plot that is conveyed in a more nuanced way by the unique narrative. His dialogue is also honest and genuine-seeming, as characters talk among themselves about topics that don’t necessarily relate to the plot in any way, building his characters and their views on different matters. There is always something at stake in his films, creating conflict in all interactions, no matter how trivial, which maintains the viewers’ attention. He also handles subtext in a way that maintains tensity in a scene, and therefore viewer interest, as seen in the prologue scene in the diner.
He was closely involved in the production process, communicating with the actors and giving direct instructions. He uses non-diegetic music to add to his scenes, adding a style, pace to tone to a scene. In pulp fiction, Tarantino uses the narrative structure to reveal things about the characters, such as Vincent’s death due to his dismissal of Jewel’s moral awakening after a near death experience. He also immerses the audience into the narrative immediately by having two people discussing organised crime casually, bringing them into the story and the characters. By the end of the film, our perspective has changed a lot between characters, as Tarantino follows separate characters and revealing things about them between scenes, such as Jewel’s job to kill, the resolution of Butch and Wallaces conflict, and Vega’s death. Characters feel relatable due to the clever dialogue, scenes are engaging through dialogue undertones andcasual violence, and an engaging narrative that immerses the audience through what it reveals about the plot and how it keeps the audience on their toes. It also uses experimentalism in the narrative structure to create a new and subjective experience for the audience who can view the film in a way they want, therefore encouraging audience participation through a structure that demands attention and experimental methods that create a memorable and engaging audience experience.
Pulp Fiction (Quentin Tarantino, 1994) is crime/gangster thriller that follows multiple characters whose arcs intertwine and play out in a non-chronological order. The film is split up into five stories/sequences that swap perspectives between different characters at different points in the story.
The film is told in a unique way, as the plot does not play out chronologically, but rather the separate parts of the film are show in a jumbled and non-consecutive order. For example, the prologue, showing two people robbing a diner, is played again at the end of the film from another characters perspective. However, this scene is not the final in the story, only the plot, as they are separate in this film.
The film holds a significant place in history, as the methods through which it was told, i.e the narrative structure, use of violence and swearing, casual conversation, etc. were very new to film at the time. Tarantino took a cliche, conventional film genre and made it his own, individual work through distinct dialogue, tropes specific to him as a filmmaker, and a unique narrative structure.
I personally very much enjoyed Pulp Fiction. I enjoyed listening to the clever dialogue, the violent and shocking action sequences, the moments of intensity and the interesting mode of telling an entertaining and stylistic story. Tarantino utilises signature actors and iconic, classy music to give the film a slick aesthetic. It’s characters and quotes are iconic, and the story is intriguing and riveting. I rate Pulp Fiction ★★★★★!
Component 2d contains the corse study areas of context, representation, key elements and aesthetics, and the specialist study areas of autership and narrative. We cover the 1994 Quentin Tarantino film Pulp Fiction, which has been chosen for it’s unique and experimental plot structure. Tarantino is also considered an auteur director with a signature style who creates his own, individual works.
Past questions have focused on the directors approach to filmmaking and the experimental use of editing and sound in the film, how narrative reinforces themes and how far Pulp Fiction is an auteur film. The unit focuses on the unique aspects of the film and the director who made it, and we are required to demonstrate knowledge and understanding of elements of film and it to an analysis of how to construct and communicate meaning in a film.
Curfew – One thing that i like about this frame and may try to emulate is the colour palette. The use of red communicates the character’s emotion and the direness of their situation. I will likely use cooler, softer colours to create my own theme and emotions, affecting the audience’s reception to the scene with the colours in frame, making them feel more sympathy for the audience. This shot would be taken in landscape mode, more carefully framed and with the actor more in-tune with the actor in Curfew. I also want to have the camera be higher up, so that the subject’s head does not take up too much of the frame. SkyfallAlthough the inspiration for this shot is not a short film chosen by the exam board, I still got the idea to implement light blocking and colouring from this shot. Meshes of The AfternoonI also like how this shot turned out. Although the focus on the screen could be improved, and the zoom-out could be slower, which will be hard to achieve since this is the slowest zoom out on the app that I was using, I think the final sabot looks how I wanted. I will probably paint the inside of the tube a metallic or dark colour to make the moment more surreal, and hide how I made it. I Amy also use a longer tube to make up for how fast the zoom-out was. Pitch Black HeistI think that I actually pulled this shot off quite well, probably because I was relying on natural lighting and using a steadicam/phone gimbal. I think that if I can make movements this smooth and track the subject this well in the final film, I will have pulled this shot off well.La JetéeThis is what I plan on my flashback sequence looking like, however with pictures of people having a party of family get together, likely with the protagonist in one frame or the images from his perspective, to communicate with the audience that his relationship with his family used to be much closer.Stutterer – for this shot I definitely want to emulate the lighting. The soft lighting combined with he intense focus on the subject’s face keeps the audiences focus on them, and the lighting adds a more somber, silent atmosphere to the shot. However, I may try to use a more natural light to create a more positive atmosphere, as the moment will be more positive in my film. I have practiced lighting this shot in three different ways. For the first practice shot, I used no light. For the second, I used the strongest light that I have, and for the third, the softer light. I also used portrait mode for all photos to keep the focus on the protagonist, like in the close-up from Stutterer. I noticed that the focus is slightly blurred though by the backlights, which may be fixed by using FilmMacPro, as I want to use an ambient backlight to emulate the shot in Stutterer better. I also want this shot to be footage, not a still image. I also plan to use this type of the shot-reverse-shot usage towards the end of my film. That done in Connect will be used at the start of the film where the protagonists are silently looking at each other and trying to avoid eye contact, thereby establishing their relationship, or, rather the potential for it. This usage in Stuterer involves the protagonists finally overcoming their obstacles and acknowledging their love or like for each other, giving the audience closure and emotional satisfaction in the ending. Although these perspectives do not line up, I plan on some of the final shots in my film to play out like this. I have taken the idea for this shot-reverse-shot from Connect, as the two characters will slowly look at each other until the camera has the opportunity to focus on each of their eyes. There is also some similarity between this and the ending scene from Stutterer, but I feel that connect did it better as the eye contact scene was more subtle and took more time leading up to it, as my film will do. I’ve also included a possibility for the creative delicious that I want toa include in this final scene. I want to add a flare that adds emotional depth and audience immersion by lighting or shooting the scene in a particular way, most likely by making one shot look as if it is taking place in a dream. I also plan on the subjects looking into the camera, immersing the audience more into their position, and making them more in tune with the character’s emotions. Connect – The lighting here catches my eye. It adds a neo-noir flare to the scene, which I like a lot, although I do not know if this will fit with my film or not. As this is at the start of the film, I may try to avoid making it romantic via the lighting and cinematography, instead setting up the potential for a romantic relationship. I will probably emulate this or Stutterer’s lighting towards the end, when the protagonists finally look into each other’s eyes, and it is more fitting. I am more likely to emulate Stutterer’s lighting, as it is more natural, romantic, and somber in tone, matching that of the story’s. Although I had to reverse this shot as the actor refused to do a re-take, I plan on the final shot looking like this, if a bit more drawn out.
For my film I will be using the song ‘Glimpse of Us’ by Joji. I decided to use this song as I came up with the idea for the film whilst listening to it. I also find that the name of the song matches the story of the film, as the protagonist is getting a glimpse into his future relationship with a potential co-worker. The song is also very somber, emotional and romantic if played in the right circumstances. Therefore, I feel that it adds some life to this emotionless office space, as does the man’s relationship with the love interest, and matches the tone of the film perfectly. I also expect that this song will make some scenes more beautiful than if they were silent or used diegetic sounds, particularly the scene where the two protagonists look into each others’ eyes at the end of the film. It will add an atmosphere to the film that will immerse the audience and develop an emotional response to what they are seeing.
Above is the storyboard for my short film. I have picked out the most important shots from the script and drawn them with annotations to describe shot camera movements, actor blocking or lighting specific to each shot. I used shots from the first draft of the script, as the final draft is much shorter as it focuses much less on the cinematography and more on the dialogue and actor prompts/directions. The first draft is much longer, but directs me on what shots I am going to include and how I will direct certain scenes in advance, so that I do not have to decide or improvise on set.
Above is the first script for my short film. I realise that it may be too long, so I will aim to shorten it and cut out the unnecessary detail on cinematography. I will likely follow the steps regarding how I will film this (i.e shots, camera movements, etc.), but cut it out in the final draft to create a more concise, effective and clean script.
Second/Final Draft:
This is my second and final script draft. I stripped out all of the unneeded steps on cinematography and some actor prompts. I will not improvise on set, but rather follow the steps in the first draft where I feel it necessary and possibly make changes while filming if I feel that it will create a better end product. The reason that I only did two drafts was because I felt that the first one communicated my vision how I wanted, down to each shot. I also wanted, though, to have a more concise, to-the-point script that did not contain too many specific instructions as to how to make my film. The first draft, therefore, will serve as a sort of handbook on how to shoot my film, whereas the final draft communicates the narrative and flow of the story much better.
Conclusion:
For my script, I wanted to create a likeable protagonist that could get the audience to root for them in only a few minutes. I also wanted to briefly give them a backstory to develop them to the point that they felt like a fleshed out character. I also wanted to create believable chemistry between him and the love interest. I also wanted to get across how strong his like was for the love interest by emphasising how miserable the job was, so his choice to apply for it carried more meaning. I also decided to add a comedic moment in how the protagonist realised that they had time-travelled, to add a more light hearted nature to the film. My overall aim was to incorporate a sci-fi premise, time travel, in a romantic film to act as an interesting plot-device, which I think that I did successfully.
My film will only include 5 characters. The protagonist, love-interest, antagonist, and two side characters.
The protagonist, Danny, will be played by Alistair Grant. I have chosen him as he is happy to take the role, and is also a likeable, relatable person. He is also dating the love-interest in real life, which will help to create chemistry between the two main characters. I also plan on making him look younger by giving him a wig or hat and darkening his beard. using the same actor in both periods will reduce the chance of anyone being confused as to what the match cut was supposed to signify.
Alistair GrantSam Grant, Alistair’s son, will play the younger version of him if he agrees to be in the film. If not, I will use Alistair for both time periods and find a way of making him look younger, perhaps with a wig or by darkening his beard.
The love interest, Emma, will be played by Tracy Cairns. She is a charismatic person, who can get along well with people, which makes her suitable for the role. She is also very sociable with strangers, which is something that her character, Lisa, is also, as seen in the opening scene when she meets the protagonist.
Tracy Cairns
The antagonist, Mark, will be played by Trevor Cairns, who has experience in work environments like this and in this career, so can match these manager characteristics accurately. The antagonist is not an antagonist in the sense that they create a conflict in the film or set events in motion, but rather exists and is written to emphasise the hostile work environment that the protagonist works in. The worse the workplace is, the more meaningful and powerful the protagonists depiction to take it will be as a result. A big aspect of the story is that this person sees their own future and the grim nature of it, assuming they take the job, but the bond that they built with one of their co-workers was so strong that the reality of their potential future was not a factor in their depiction to take the job. They’ve been given the chance to avoid having this awful job, but disregard its negative qualities because of this person.
Trevor Cairns
The two side characters will be played by Donovan Miles and Harry Batkin. These will be two unnamed office workers who serve as extras for most of the film, mostly for the purpose of making the office space feel more real. However, one, Donovan Miles, may have a negative interaction with the protagonist or antagonist at one point to signify the un-kind nature of this workplace and the protagonists isolation in working there.
My short film will take place in an office environment. I was planning on using light, subdued colours that were bland, emulating the sadness and boredom the protagonist feels in there. I was also going to do this for the kitchen at the start and end, as this will get across how quiet and simple this person’s life is, and why their decision to apply for the office job is so important and, therefore, how powerful their bond was with their future co-worker.
I was even planning on the outside of the office to be bland and likely hard-lit to create an empty, liminal, dead atmosphere, while the inside of the office will be soft-lit with dark shadows and an overall empty space to get across how miserable working there is. I also want my film to be peaceful, so an isolated, homogenous in design office building is what I had in mind.
I will be shooting in the Riseholme College Agri – Tech Centre, Health & nutrition building. This location contains areas that I will include in my film, such as an outside break area, desk spaces, an elevator and stairs. It’s paint scheme is also made up of soft, bland hues, with a modern and simple architectural design. It suits the atmosphere and mood of the film perfectly, allowing for me to reflect the characters emotions and the importance of the bond in the film forming here, of all places.
This hallway could be anywhere, which is exactly what I want to portray with this location. The homogeneity and unoriginal it’s of it.I may use a hidden cut as the protagonist walks up these stairs by placing the camera behind one of the bars to allow for an edited in transition to the top of the stairs. A wide shot of someone sat at this circular bench will likely be included in the film to create a more peaceful, though provoking moment. I can also let the wind rise in the mix as the protagonist falls asleep, allowing for a sudden cut back to the kitchen. I think that the amount of paper stacked here gets across in the mise-en-scene the workload that the protagonist faces in taking this job.
One of the most commonly used cameras for shooting movies is the Arrival Alexa Mini. Favoured for its portability, modular form and durability. It uses an Alex III Sensor which shoots in 28.25mm x 18.17mm.
Lenses:
The inside of spherical lenses are made up of many pieces of curved glass, called elements. Spherical lenses are called spherical because their elements are circular. When light passes through the lens elements and hits the digital sensor it produces a regular, uncompressed image. The elements at the back of a anamorphic lens are regular spherical elements, but the the elements at the front of the lens appear oval rather than circular when looked though. This produces a squeezed image when light reaches the sensor, which is then reversed through editing. Anamorphic lenses provide a widescreen aspect ratio as a result, while traditional spherical aspect ratios are more square, most commonly 1.33:1 and 1.85:1. Anamorphic lenses produce a wider aspect ratio such as 2.35: 1 or 2.39:1. Spherical lenses produced spherical bokeh, while anamorphic produce oval shaped bokeh. Spherical lenses use led glass, simpler mechanics and produce sharper images with minimal distortion across the image. Anamorphic lenses have reduced sharpness, increased distortion and falloff, where there is more distortion and softness closer to the edges of the image, and produce more dramatic lens flares.
My Equipment:
For my film I will be using my phone camera for filming. I have an Oppo A54, which contains 4 cameras and shoots in 1080p with 30fps. It is also more portable than the iPad, allowing for me to make faster and more smooth camera movements than if using a tripod that can hold the iPad. I will also be using a Hohem ISteady mobile phone gimbal. This is will serve as a steadicam for my phone, allowing for the footage to be more steady, and movements to be more smooth. It will also allow for more fast movements such as pans, crabs and dolly’s, tracking shots. However, to ensure that I can keep control of focus and exposure, I will be using FilMacPro. This will prevent obvious focus pulls or faulty exposure, making for proper lighting and focus on what is important in frame. Even though I do not plan on including any focus pulls in the film, it will still prevent any moment where the camera struggles to focus on something in frame being in the final film.
Lighting:
There are many ways that lighting can be made to work how the filmmaker wants it via homemade methods. For example, bin bags can double as negative fill. Paper can create light diffusion and mirrors can be used to bounce light. For my film, I plan on using a bedsheet to diffuse the natural light coming into the office and the garden to soften the shadows and the contrast. It will soften the sunlight’s intensity and even out the shadows in frame, to give the office a more cool and dull feeling, like it is devoid of brightness and life, metaphorically, represented through the visuals.
I may use this sheet as a light diffuser if, when they are facing the window, the subject’s face is too sharply exposed or illuminated by the sunlight coming through it. This is the torch that I will be using as a key light, as it is the strongest. It is powerful and encompasses a wide area, allowing for plenty, high quality light in my film.This torch will be my fill light to soften shadows created by the stronger key light and control the level of contrast on the subject’s face. This headlight is the weakest of all the lights that I will be using, so it will be used a back light to separate the subject of a shot from the background. To ensure that my film is not overly bright or exposed I will be using diffusion through this white, transparent fabric, serving as a filter through which the light will be made softer and more eye-pleasing. This black fabric will act as a negative fill, which I will use to increase the shadows of some scenes and create more moody, dark and soft lighting with smoother contrasts. This golden fabric will act as a filter to colour the light in a few shots, creating a more beautiful, eye-catching and aesthetically pleasing image, adding a creative flare to the shots.
Camera:
For my film, I will include both stationary and mobile shots, so will be using different equipment to achieve these movements and angles.
This is the tripod that I will be using. Despite the fact that it can be moved to track a subject, I still plan on using my phone gimbal for any mobile, tracking shots to produce a smoother movement and less disorienting shot. I will use the tripod for stationary shots only, to keep the camera completely still and steady in close ups, mid-shots, zooms, etc. Above are 3 of my favourite examples of my phone camera quality!
Lighting is crucial in film, despite the fact that it often goes unnoticed by the audience. It sets apart amateur and professional filmmaking, and 3 point lighting is the standard of lighting techniques in Hollywood, referring to the placement of the lights on set, around the subject in frame. Any combination of lighting works, such as 1 or 4, but 3 is the most commonly used. 2 cameras are placed in front of the subject and 1 behind them. The two front ones are the key and fill light, the one behind the back light.
The key light is the main one on set, as it is the brightest and covers the subjects face the most. This can be a side, frontal or high angle light. The most common key light comes from a 45 degree angle In front of the subjects face. This forms a triangle shaped light on their face, which is also known as the Rembrandt light.
The key light is on the other side of the key light. It’s purpose is to fill in the shadows given by the key light. It is common to place it opposite the key light while dimming done the brightness to avoid flattening out the subjects face. Sometimes the fill light is just a reflector board utilising the key light, reflecting it back at the subject. Sometimes fill lights aren’t used at all, if the shadows are there for a reason or do not make much difference to the film.
The backlight’s purpose is to separate the subject from the background. It is most commonly placed 45 degrees behind the subject, illuminating their shoulders and the back of their head. There is also a hair light, placed directly behind the subject giving a halo effect and illuminating the shoulders and back of head. The rim light is placed far off to the side of the subject to illuminate the chin and the jaw.
Low-key lighting is characterised by stored shadows with deep blacks with areas of highlights. It is done by using minimal light, such as using a single backlight. High-key lighting evens exposure across the frame with minimal contrast and a more illuminated image overall, often leaving few shadows. Hard/direct light comes from shining a light source directly onto a subject, resulting in defined shadows with clear separation lines between light and dark. Soft/diffused light produces shadows with softer edges and less defined shadows with less sharp separation between light and dark areas in frame. This can be used by bouncing light off a surface or shining it through a diffusion, or both! Textiles, bedsheets, shower curtains and wrapping paper are homemade ways of producing soft-light in films. Many combinations can be used in lighting to create new types, such as when the fill light is taken away to create low key lighting because the overall lighting hitting the subjects face is low. The more light is diffused, the lower the overall illumination in a film is.
Colour temperature can also be used to create contrast, such as a subject being illuminated by a warm, tungsten light against a cooler, more blue background can separate the two more, creating depth between them, even if the result is a more soft separation line. This can be done by shining lights through coloured screen to create lights with different colour tints or a hue covering the entire frame.
As there can be a realist and expressionist approach to filmmaking narrative, naturalistic and expressionist lighting can be used. Naturalistic involves using natural, ambient light to create a more realistic scene. Expressionist lighting involves altering things like light colour, shape and quality of light to create an effect on the audience, even if it is not realistic/natural as a result. Naturalistic techniques can be examining where ambient, real light exists on a set and using artificial lighting to emulate and enhance it accurately, or using black textiles to subtract light and therefore create more shadow while retaining a realistic shape to the light, which is known as negative fill.
For my film, I will need to find different methods of creating proper lighting in scenes. As the film takes place at day in a naturally well lit office, it wont take up much time, if any. However, for my other short film, which has a scene that takes place at night, this will be more important. I can use torches held behind sheets kept out of frame, or car headlights for a natural backlight. For another short film that I plan on making, I will experiment with coloured screens to shine light through to add a hue to the shot with the purpose of having an effect on the audience, reflecting emotion, or creating an atmosphere that adds depth to the shot.
This is similar to one shot from my film. I will bring a bed sheet and head torch to the set and see if the shot looks better with or without a key light implemented. However, for this scene, I will probably just use the naturalistic back light of the car headlights to add a more dramatic tone to the scene by keeping most of it in shadow. I have drawn a diffusion sheet at the right side of this frame to show where I may place it while filming for my coursework. This will soften the shadows and slightly reduce the exposure of the shots in this room, as less sunlight will be hitting the subject’s face. I found that yellow sticky notes doubled as a weak but reliable yellow light filter, although gold would serve this particular shot better, so I may look into filters or screens to shine light through. I shone light through the filter at a leaf to produce shadows on the other side amongst a soft, yellow light made more prominent by the dark background. This leaf is called a ‘dingle’, and may be propped up by a stand on set to keep it in place, although I like the idea of it moving slightly to create a more hypnotic look to the shadows, and therefore the shot. This can even make it look as if it is taking place under a jungle canopy, making the moment feel much more secluded, romantic and fantastical. This is called ‘shaping’, and I plan to shape the light on set for this shot to produce an interesting shadow and light display on the subject’s face. This is a recreation of what I plan on the shot looking like. I think that I will use a stronger light, larger and stronger, more golden filter, darker background and smaller leaves to produce a more defined shadow on the subject’s face. I also want for the shadows to be darker, creating a stronger contrast, and will possibly place a negative fill screen on the right side of the set to increase the a shadows there, thereby increasing the illumination on the other side of the subject’s face. I also plan to improve the focus on the subject’s face and decrease that in the background. This shot is what inspired me to use light shaping in my film to create a standout shot. Here is how it was done. Black screens block light from the top and bottom of the left side of the frame and all of the right side, but light is allowed to reach the subject’s eyes to add a more dramatic tone to the shot. They are separated from the background by the backlight, and the hard lighting here creates a sharp contrast, adding more intensity to the lighting, therefore giving the shot a more dramatic and tense feeling/atmosphere.
A script is the basis for what is said and done in your film. A storyboard is the graphic prompt for how that film is shot and presented. It is typically formatted as 6 rectangular boxes along a page, the shots organised in chronological order of the top to the right side of the page. There are also usually boxes beneath each shot to give information specific to the shot/box above it, such as audio cues, actions by actors, or what number the shot is. Arrows can also be included to direct actor or camera movements, which may be useful for crab or pan shots. Each storyboard shot needs to capture the shot’s subject, background, camera shot and camera movement. It will provide a basis for each specific shot that I will stick to as a manual, of sorts, while filming. It also provides a visual prediction of what your film will look like, and therefore, what sort issues It may have, allowing me to avoid them in advance.
They are made to help the author focus on each individual shot as they film, making the film more cohesive and fleshed out. I have created another storyboard for the other short film that i am preparing to make, as I created another screenplay for it. This will also serve as practice for the storyboard I will create for the coursework short film. After making this, I think that I will draw the portfolio, as it allows for me to be more specific with what shots will look like than taking pictures in advance. I can manipulate the environment more and get across what is most important in that shot, and plan on the exact framing instead of experimenting with different aspect ratios on set, so that I will have an exact template foe what my film will look like.
I have also created another storyboard for the other short film that i am preparing to make, as I created another screenplay for it. This will also serve as practice for the storyboard I will create for the coursework short film. After making this, I think that I will do this
Above is the storyboard that I made in preparation for my other short film and as practice for my coursework film. These shots are not exact, but, as they will do for the coursework, get across the overall visual style of the film.
A screenplay is the script of a film. As part of the preparation process, I’ll need to create one for my coursework. To do this, I’ll familiarise myself with screenplay formatting and conventions.
As my production idea and treatment have been done already, I will need to break my plot into arcs/components. These will be the introduction scene, which will probably last a minute. Then, the second act, which will follow the protagonists story, lasting probably 3 minutes. And, finally, the conclusion, wrapping up the plot and resolving the conflict, which will also likely last a minute.
From looking into screenplay conventions, I know that it is necessary to describe each shot and action in detail. The screenplay is the foundation of the storyboard, which will both be used to create my film precisely as Ive planned. As long as I stick to exactly what the screenplay and storyboard say, I will have each action, shot, camera movement, line, delivery, tone and expression prepared to film. So while writing my screenplay, I need to build as much detail as possible to get my vision across and help me decide on any necessary changes before filming. This is why I have been advised to write a draft screenplay.
One piece of advice I read was that I should write a first draft, read over it and make changes if needed, and then write a final draft or however many necessary until I’ve come to a final draft. I’ve read that I should not bee to critical of my first draft, and to just write what I feel I should. I should not go back and update actions or dialogue until I’ve finished the first draft. Instead I should finish, go back through it, analyse and edit where I feel its necessary. After taking a break, I should come back and make readjustment to improve the script. This may require multiple redrafts before I come to my final draft. As I will need to show evidence of draft screenplays alongside my final draft, I will do this, and take time in realising and perfecting my screenplay to match the story I’m setting out to make.
As part of my preparation for writing the screenplay, I wrote a screenplay for another short, 5 or so minute film. This one I spent a few hours writing after creating a treatment to go off. This will go into my film portfolio once it is made, but in the meantime has made me more familiar with sticking to the screenplay format and using screenplay conventions.
Above is the screenplay that I wrote. This was partly to practice for the coursework script and also to have it ready to include in my film portfolio, as I am also preparing to make another short film in my spare time. What is shown here is the second and likely final draft. I received input that the dialogue was too obvious about character emotion and intention, lacked subtlety or, in other words, was too on the nose. I went back and made it less revealing of the characters’ emotions, etc. I also made it less wooden at points, such as the long monologue in the centre. I wanted it to sound realistic, so thought about how two real people would communicate this conversation in this scenario, depending on the personality’s and backstory’s I’ve given them here, and I feel it works and flows better now.
The reception to my film was mostly positive. My teacher said that the actual plot was fine, but I should focus on trying to convey to the audience that the younger character is the same person as the older man in the office. This is something I can do easily by using the same actor and trying to make them look younger when applying for the job. However, that may be difficult, and using another, younger actor may get across the passage of time better. However, it will be hard to find a similar actor, so using the same person saves me having to include some cue for the audience to understand that it is the same person in the past and future. I will already have to do that to convey the fact that there is a jump between past and present in the film.
The conclusion that I’ve come to for now is that I should use a similar actor, or as similar as I can find, and use a match cut for when they go from past to future. More specifically I could have an extreme close up of their eyes shut, then cut to the new, older actor when they open, and dolly out to reveal that they are older now. This was the sort of visual implication I was planning on to inform the audience that despite the actor having changed, they are still the same person and, therefore, a significant amount of time has passed in that one match cut.
Today I pitched my short film idea to my class. I read an overview of the treatment to get across the whole story and the meanings of it without getting into too much detail like specific shots or lines of dialogue.
To prepare for my film, I need to organise casting, locations, script, storyboard and narrative.
Progress so far:
So far the story, plot and narrative has been organised, and I also have some specific dialogue and shots in mind that I covered in my treatment. However, I still need to find out what locations I’m using and who will be playing what characters.
Casting:
As there will be a passage of time, I was considering using actors who are older than me. However, It will be easier to get actors who are of a similar age to me. Therefore, I think that the people working at the office will be mostly interns/apprentices, including the protagonist and the love-interest. I will ask my mum if she can be the woman, and her boyfriend to be the protagonist. I may have to use a wig to show that there has been a passage of time from when we see him in the past and the future. I can also ask him to shave his beard!
Tracy Cairns
I have organised for my mum, Tracy Cairns, to be the love interest in the film and her boyfriend, Alistair Grant, to be the lead. I feel that their chemistry may play well on screen, putting less pressure on the dialogue and their delivery of it.
Alistair Grant
I also need to ask 2 or 3 other actors to play the co-workers and the office boss/manager. I was considering two friends from school as inters/apprentices, and my dad, Trevor Cairns, to be the unpleasant manager.
Trevor Cairns – The inconsiderate and passive-aggressive office manager.Donovan MilesHarry Batkin
Locations:
I will probably use my home kitchen for where the protagonist is applying for their job at the start and end of the film. I was considering using my dad’s office as a location for the office space, but I will need to check for permission by the people who own it. I will visit the location and see for myself how suitable it is for the script, as in if it is big enough, has a garden, table, etc. I will also need to organise how the actors will get there, and what areas I will be able to shoot in.
This is the sort of office space that I have in mind. This is where I got inspiration for the bench-wide shot. This is what I plan on one of the shots of the man at the start of the film on his laptop to look like.
Production Brief:
I have organised how I’m going to implement my production brief, a non-linear narrative, into the film. I am going to show a scene of two characters at the start, and these two are going to be later revealed towards the end. This will link up the beginning, is set in the future, and the end. It will reveal what happened after the final shot, and add meaning to the beginning.
Short Film Inspiration:
As part of this coursework, I need to take ideas from 90 minutes worth of the short films that we have watched. I have not planned exactly what these will all be, but some include the silent close up of the protagonist looking at the camera from Stutterer (Benjamin Cleary, 2015), the opening and ending shots from Curfew (Shawn Christiensen, 2012), the tracking shot from Pitch Black Heist (John Maclean, 2011), and the shot-reverse-shots from Connect (Samuel Abrahams, 2010).
Working Title: Self Fulfilling Prophet. (I am using this title for now as it matches the theme of the story, but may change it later to something more abstract or meaningful/interpretative)
The opening shot is a wide shot of a woman at a table in an office space. A close up of her phone screen reveals that she is listening to ‘Glimpse of Us’, Joji. She is listening to this and eating lunch when someone sits opposite to her. She takes her earphones out and says hello to him, welcoming him “to hell”, thereby revealing that this is his first day working there. He surprises her by saying that she was listening to the artist’s best single. She is taken aback and laughs awkwardly, but agrees with him. They then share headphones and begin listening to it together.
The film cuts to a man sat in his kitchen is looking at a laptop screen. He is looking at an email that he is drafting and preparing to send to a business to apply for a job there. They take a break from the computer and make themselves a drink and put on some music, which is the same song from earlier. As the song plays they consider sending the email and slowly shut their eyes as they listen to the song. When they next open their eyes there is suddenly no music playing and they are in a new place, an office. They stand and look around. They have a new phone, and look much older now. They look out their office window and see a garden outside.
They leave the building and sit outside in the garden where it is quiet and they can think. They sit for awhile, obviously confused by what is happening. They shut their eyes and suddenly return to their kitchen. They breathe heavily and quickly shut off the song, clearly disturbed by what is happening. After a few seconds of calming down and re-considering, they put the song back on and slowly shut their eyes again, opening them after a few seconds to find themselves back in the garden. They realise that wherever they are, it is in the future and a few years have passed by now. They then re-enter the building and begin walking around to see more of the place. As they walk around they come across a group of men who seem to be his co-workers. They joke about making him redundant, and one of them, who seems to be the man’s boss, takes him aside and genuinely threatens to fire him if he does not work the weekend. They then laugh at him as he walks away.
After walking around for a bit longer they begin to hear a distant song playing, the song that they were listening to in the kitchen. They approach the source of the sound, eventually coming across a woman who is playing it on her phone speaker. After a few seconds they turn around and realise that their headphones aren’t plugged in. She laughs awkwardly and apologises that it was so loud. The man awkwardly says it’s fine and that he would only be mad if she was playing bad music. They then talk a bout the song and the history of the artist. After they talk, she asks him is he’d like to listen to it with her. He does so, sitting next to her and putting a headphone in. They slowly make eye contact and laugh together, before the man suddenly return to his kitchen.
The song ends as the man sits at his kitchen table, looking straight at his laptop screen. After the room falls silent, the man sits in thought for a moment. He then moves the cursor on his screen to the ‘send email’ button. The film ends just as he sends off his application email. The final shot is of the older version of the protagonist preparing to go over and talk to the woman, which is the opening shift from his perspective.
Today we were introduced to the pre-production process for our coursework. The first stage in this process is to come up with a production idea, which I will go over in this blog post.
Production Idea: My production idea is about a man who is considering to apply for a job who, as he goes over the choice in his mind constantly, suddenly sees into his future and what the his life is like after getting the job. The things that they learn would dissuade him if not for the person he meets in his future, who he decides to apply to the job for. The Production Brief non-linear narrative, as my film will swap between time periods. I have not yet organised the locations or cast that I will use, but I am confident in my plot and plan to work around it. If small changes need to be made then that can happen, but the overall narrative and plot I am set on.
La Ricotta (Pier Paolo Pasolini, 1962) follows an actor who is taking part in an adaptation of the deaths of Christ who finds himself starving to death mid-shoot.
The film swaps between focusing on the director of the movie, the actor, and the crew. It does this to put on display ones suffering juxtaposed to the other’s ignorance and arrogance, and therefore signifying to the audience the reality of this situation. It also switches from a serious, symbolic drama to a slapstick comedy, as one minute a man is dying from starvation due to the rest of the cast’s ignorance to his existence, and the next he will be ruining across a field in sped up footage to make his movements more comedic.
The themes of ignorance and class divide between working and upper is outlined through actions, as the conversation between the director and a journalist reveals his eccentricity and obsession with his own work. The film then cuts to the protagonist being forced to hoard food in a cave. The same thing happens at then end, where wealth visitors come to see the production of the film, but only find the protagonist dead on a cross. The film also uses symbolism, such as when the actresses dog eats the protagonists lunch, thus causing him to starve further. Another example is when the protagonist being put onto the cross is teased by the people attaching him to it with food and drink, emulating the actual crucifixion of Christ.
One moment that I remember is when the actors are pretending to be figures from famous religious paintings, staying completely still and in careful, planned positions and poses. The wide shot used here and the use of colour brings our attention to what the director is trying to emulate, and when it cuts back to the film crew, the film is in black and white and imperfectly framed shots. The use of the wide shot here to bring the audiences attention to everything in frame, and the potential symmetry and framing of the shot.
Night Fishing (Park Chan-wook, 2011) is a 33 minute short film that follows a man on a fishing trip who catches more than he bargained for after dragging the corpse of a woman out of a lake.
The film is interesting for a number of reasons. Firstly, the entire film was shot on iPhone. Despite this, the film only uses a unique movement once, towards the beginning where a crane shot pans right as the camera moves over the ground. Throughout the rest of the film, usual camera movements and shots are used. However, the camera is remains still and steady, and after some time I forgot that the film was shot on a phone.
The other interesting thing about the film is the fact that it begins as a music video, with a band performing a song. The film remains on them for almost 3 minutes, before eventually swapping focus to the protagonist The lyrics of the song add meaning to the film, but this music video format is a sharp contrast to the supernatural thriller/horror that follows.
Finally, the film includes a twist around 18 minutes in, the reveal being that the protagonist is actually dead, and currently transitioning to the afterlife. The woman they meet is the spiritual medium in real life who he uses to communicate with his family for the final time. This twist is very sudden, but takes a few moments to be explained to the audience, as we cut to a completely new location where the previously dead woman is now alive and screaming in front of a group of people in what seems to be some sort of ritual practice. It is then shown to us, not through dialogue but through mise-en-scene and performances, that the fisherman passed away while on a fishing trip. We see this from an image of him decorated with candles, which reflects people mourning over him, and his family being clearly distraught as they talk to him through the medium. The twist is well done, but very jarring as the camera suddenly cuts from still close ups to a handheld wide shot, and the transition takes a minute as the woman is submerged and hallucinates the lake that she was in previously. It also completely removes a character, and changes the course of the story for the final 15 minutes, which are much more emotional than the previous scenes, which were suspenseful and even disturbing at points.
Some shots that I remember in particular and may choose to include in my final film is the handheld tracking crab shot of the woman after climbing out of the bath, the close low angle shot of the woman’s face, or the arch shot that circles around the fisherman as he sits patiently by the lake with his fishing rods set up in front of him. These are all shots that I may use in my own film, although the idea of using a twist would completely alter my idea and the execution of it, as-well as a musical performance to set up the film, so I will not use them in my film.
Swimmer (Lynne Ramsay, 2012) is a 16 minute short film that follows a man who swims through rivers and lakes, listening to people along his way and finally trying to reconnect with society towards the end of the film.
The film is shot in black and white, which makes the bodies of water water look much deeper and wider, therefore more intimidating to the audience. It shows how the man, the swimmer, feels much more free in these places, as all of this space belongs to him. This is also communicated through close-ups that show how skilled he is at making his way through the water, and long shots that emphasise how deep the water is and how fearless they are of it. The film also inconsistently swaps perspective between him and people on land, which shows how others see him, and therefore how strange this scenario is to the audience, but also by swapping back to the swimmers perspective we can see more sense in his actions, as we see the skill with which he travels, and the stunning beauty of the water.
The film also relies heavily on the non-diegetic composed score, as there is little to no dialogue in it. The music is nationalistic, which doesn’t seem to be for patriotic or propagandistic reasons, but to add a powerful and grand quality to these scenes of a man swimming. They make this strange and bizarre situation more beautiful, as the musics power and grandiose adds a moving atmosphere to these scenes, accompanying the shots of rural scenery and the man swimming through it. It is very intense, and at the beginning adds a peaceful quality to the scene, making it feel more surreal and calming. Here it accompanies wide shots of the countryside to emphasise the beauty of what the man is doing. In the middle of the film, it is used to create more intense and distressing scenes for when the man is attacked by children or tries to walk on land. This accompanies extreme closeups of the man and the carnival rides, making the environment feel much more hostile and intimidating. At the end of the film, wide shots are accompanied by powerful and moving music, which makes the final scene feel more powerful and moving even if what is happening is not entirely clear. A monologue about a runner’s life being lonely is played over here to add more profound meaning to this artistic and visually stunning moment, and partially explains why the swimmer sinks below the surface at the end.
The film uses many close ups of the man swimming, and as the picture is very high quality, this brings to our attention the beauty of the environment and the man swimming in it. The film also uses some interesting techniques, such as reverse slow motion footage, first person perspectives that rise in and out of water, and extreme close of wide shots. These techniques lead to the film having a very dream-like and ethereal feel, as intensity rises suddenly in the middle before falling again in the last few minutes.
Some techniques that stick with me are the use of slow motion, sharp contrast between black and white, reliance on the non-diegetic composed score and use of close ups to impact the audience. These create a powerful, moving and visually striking short film that conveys meaning through music and actions, rather than dialogue or character. A good example of this is when the man leaves the water to see a carnival. Here extreme close ups of the rides accompanied with intense and industrial sounding music makes the audience uncomfortable in this hostile and uncalled environment, and the choice to not show any rides fully in frame makes them seem larger, more intimidating, like uncaring, industrial machines. The lack of colour also helps here, as in the water it creates a beautiful, calm and serene environment, but here illuminates the mist and bright lights, making this carnival seem like hell on Earth. This helps the audience understand the swimmers fear of this place, and therefore why he returns to the water. I may use black and white for sequences that take place in different time periods in my film, or the use of slow motion in shots where the main character is in deep thought. More likely though, the use of extreme close ups to show emotions of the characters or wide shots to bring the audiences attention to the environment. The use of powerful music to convey meaning where there is no dialogue is also an idea I will use.
Pitch Black Heist (John Maclean, 2012) is a 13 minute short film that follows a pair of thieves preparing to rob a safe hidden inside a completely dark safe room.
The film is shot in black and white, which reflects the themes of light and darkness. The characters wear all black, reflecting their professions and personalities, as both are pessimistic or reclusive. It also creates a more dark and gloomy atmosphere for the film, as the characters and environments are devoid of any colour. The noir format makes the film feel more slick and serious, as the environment is kept empty of anyone other than the protagonists who stand out clearly with their clothes that don’t match the background palette, keeping the audiences focus on them. It focuses on the relationships between the protagonists, which is developed not through dialogue, as one is vey reclusive and silent, while on is outgoing and extroverted. What small snippets of dialogue there is very carefully reveals important information about the characters. For example, the older, more sociable man talks about, earlier in the film, how he is not used to more modern robberies of things like hardware and technology, implying his age and time in this line of work. Later on, the more quiet man quickly mentions how he resents his father for leaving when he was a child, and then a few minutes later that his dad was also a vault thief, and he has followed his footsteps, in a sense. This careful choice of what to reveal and what to hide explains the sudden betrayal at the end of the film for those who paid attention earlier in the film. The actions and expressions of the characters in the pub sequence are the main way that the director signals a growing bond between them both.
One moment that I remember is when the two characters are arm wrestling in front of a white background, which illuminates them. They are often wearing dark clothes against a dark background, so when they are in a lighter environment they are easier to see. I also remember the almost 2 minute long scene that takes place in the pitch black room. This reliance on audio places us in the position of the protagonists, and as there has been lots of buildup throughout the rest of the film, this moment is made even more suspenseful by the complete lack of music in the entire film other than the ambient, diegetic music played in the pub so signify the characters’ drunkenness. The deliberate use of silence to build suspense, the careful choice of dialogue to build character and buildup to the sudden ending, the tense silence between characters and use of black and white with contrasting uniforms against backdrops all stick with me, and I may even use on or two in my own film.
La Jetée (Chris Marker, 1962) is an experimental 28 minute short film that takes place in a dystopian future that exists after the nuclear World War 3, where a man is experimented on to see if he can travel through time and find the saviour of what remains of mankind.
The film is very interestingly shot, as every shot is a still image, and the editing between them is not rapid enough, or at all, to make the film stop motion. Instead, it plays out almost like a graphic novel, where each shot is its own photograph. It is a very unique method of storytelling through cinematography, and contributes to the feeling that much of what we, the audience, see is essentially a flashback . This also works for scenes set in the future, but ultimately makes the film feel like an art project that places emphasis on each individual shot which is beautiful in its own right. Another interesting aspect of the film is that there is no actual dialogue by the characters in the film. In fact, they do not even have names. What the film relies on completely to convey information as to what is being shown in each frame is a narrator, who explains the context to the film, what we are seeing, and what it means. This heavy reliance on the narrator results in constant narration throughout the film, which Chris Marker occasionally breaks up with compilations of shots that do not need explanation, such as the scene in the museum, where the audience understands what is happening and can be left to appreciate it for a few moments. These moments allow for you to become connected to these characters, despite their lack of input to the plot and the way that they are presented in the third person by the narrator. This narration and the absence of any real character, combined with the single-shot dynamic make the film feel more like a story that is being told to us with visual accompaniment than a film we become involved in as we feel characters develop and lose ourselves in the plot.
What sticks with me is the use of narration, still images, and sound design to carry along through multiple shots to create pace and intensity where the content and pace of shots does not. Despite the sometimes frustrating and slow nature of these shots, they do make the film feel unique and stylistic, and also contribute to a very interesting way of communicating a unique plot with lots of potential. It conveys this interesting plot through it’s interesting technique, which makes the film so memorable. The use of a sudden, shock ending also makes the story a tragedy, and the somber, neo-noir execution of this pessimistic and grim future scenario makes the film interesting and entertaining in its own right, even without the use of its photographic form of cinematography. It’s use of single, still shots is something that I may use in my own short film, if I include a flashback scene, or single photographs that I may cut to a close up of.
The Grandmother (David Lynch, 1970) follows a young boy who suffers through an abusive relationship with his parents but strives to cope by planting a seed that soon sprouts into a caring grandmother.
The film is immediately distinctive, as it switches between live action and 2d animation made up of paper clippings. Both aspects of the film’s form are artistic, as even the live action uses fast paced and rapidly edited together still shots to create stop motion movement. David Lynch creates extremely unnatural and sometimes disturbing moments by combining live action and 2d animation, and also uses sound design to make very surreal and unusual effects that have a lasting impact on the audience. I remember this film for its very strange and unique story, effects and animation. The performances are also very unnatural, as the characters do not act at all human, which makes the film feel more like a surreal and dream-like experience, that more than often evolves into a nightmare.
The film is artistic, and favours interesting techniques and an unconventional story told through surreal and unusual methods like 2d animation and mise-en-scene to leave a lasting impression on the audience. I remember in particular the impressive cocoon that was built to show how the grandmother came to be born from a single seed. The mise-en-scene here is very disturbing to see, as the spectacle of a human growing from a plant-like organism is hallucinatory, and very ambitious from the director. What is also impressive is how Lynch establishes characters through actions rather than dialogue, as music and performance shows personalities and dynamics between them, as seen in the opening scene where the boy’s father abuses him as the whole family act like a pack of dogs. Another interesting aspect to talk about is how the film will often end a sequence through a sudden and jarring freeze frame where audio will echo out until the shot fades to black. This is very unexpected each time, and is done to establish, over time, the living situation of these characters. It is a unique and abnormal method of showing the passage of time, and the exaggerated expressions and screams of the characters makes the film feel more like theatre, as their inhuman characters seem to echo real emotion, through bizarre screams, barks and shouting. As Lynch’s methods of portraying these themes and emotions are so extreme, I doubt that I will take any inspiration for my own film project.
Characters are established at the beginning, as Lynch uses the 2d animation style in the film to show how they came to also be born from the ground. His use of the animation here is to show what cannot be shown through live action, but his execution is very artistic and makes an immediate impression on the audience as to the tone and aesthetic of the rest of the film. It is definitely the most unique and unconventional shirt film that we have studied for our coursework, and I think that David Lynch achieved in his goal of creating a lasting impression on the audience.
Curfew (Shawn Christiensen, 2012) follows a man who is attempting to commit suicide but decided against it when he is asked by his desperate and estranged sister to look after her daughter. Over the course of one day, he connects with his niece, planning the whole time to finish his suicide after dropping her back off with her mum.
The plot is interesting, as both protagonists are established as imperfect people, as the nice is spoiled and ungrateful while the uncle is irresponsible and makes bad decisions. However, the relationship that builds between them feels genuine, as the uncle does want to connect with his niece, and the niece can tell that her uncle is unwell. As their relationship grows, you come to connect and sympathise with both of them, and understand their situations more.
The film uses focus to keep our attention on the protagonists, but this makes everything in the background are very blurred, which hazy neons colours that emulate a hallucination, which is because the main character is on drugs. The film also uses colours to match the mood, as seen in the beginning when the dark red floor matches the colour of the protagonists blood during his suicide attempt, but later on the contrast is higher when his niece is dancing in the bowling alley. Lens flares are also used here to emphasise the happiness of the moment. As the protagonist looks around here at his hallucination, the camera spins around his head to make the audience feel dizzy and therefore emulates the effects of the drugs he is on. The while dance sequence is shot differently yo the rest of the film, with fast camera movements, bright colours and a crab shot that tracks the girls movement along the alley, which is one of my fav shots from the film. This is a stark contrast to the stationary camera and dark colour pallets and shadows in the rest of the film, which reflects the relationship between the characters and the uncle’s depression. The makeup design in this film is also incredible, as the uncle looks genuinely severely ill, which can be seen most in the first 3 minutes when he is trying to commit suicide and meeting his niece for the first time. Here he is extremely pale, unclean, and looks miserable, tired, ill.
Some other shots that I like were the shot that looks down on the uncle in an extreme close up that is also at a dutched tilt while he is considering answering the phone call that could save his life. The wide shot if him shouting at the women outside the bathroom is also memorable, as it is framed symmetrically, and makes sharp and random cuts to represent the uncles mounting anger and to show the passage of time, therefore emphasising why the women are annoying him. The opening shot is also very clever, as it crabs right to reveal the blood, cigarettes and phone. It comes to rest on the phone, when a bloody and trembling hand also holding a razor comes into frame from above it to answer the phone. This slow reveal builds atmosphere and makes the reveal that the main character is trying to kill the self more shocking. Close ups of bloody cigarettes and a razor imply what is happening before it is finally shown. It also establishes this character while the phone call immediately establishes the conflict that sets the plot up.
This shot emphasises his anguish, and the phone being out of focus is symbolic of the fact that help is there, but he refuses to take it. `his face being in focus makes us concentrate on his expression of pain, and the matching colours of red create a dark atmosphere and reinforce the grim nature of this scene. This shot shows the desperate and fatigued look of the protagonist.
High Maintenance (Phillip Van, 2006) takes place in a not too distant future, where a wife gets into a domestic dispute with her android husband, who doesn’t wish to celebrate their anniversary the way she intends, making her take matters into her own hands.
The film all takes place in one room, so uses close ups to show the conversation between these two people. This brings our attention to their robotic expressions and dialogue, as they have no emotion or compassion in their voice, just saying sentimental words without any emotion behind them. This dystopian sci-fi concept is only kept restricted to how it operates within this boring relationship,and the twist that both people are androids who are both easily replaceable shows the grim nature of this fictional scenario. It uses a real format of a failing marriage but incorporates a fictional sci-fi twist to make it more interesting and imagine how these aspects would fuse together in real life. This interesting fantasy scenario implemented into a realistic one is an interesting way of telling a story, and is an aspect that I may involve in my own short film.
I also liked the moment when the wife shuts off her husband, as a close up on the back of his neck shows slowly tracks her hand movements to show that she is reaching for a miniature switch on the back of his neck. This sudden reveal makes the moment more shocking and entertaining, and this and the sequence afterwards of her buying a new husband shows the dark future of this short film. I also remember the shot where the camera dolly’s out off the room as it shows the wife at her computer telling the robotics company what she wants out of her new husband. This movement away emphasises her isolation and the inhumanity of what she is doing. This and the extreme close up of her face as she eyes her new android with an entranced, obsessed look are both shots that I like, as her obsession with this fake person emphasises the dystopian concept, and it brings our attention to her obsession. The clever use of repeated dialogue from both of the robot husbands also shows their lack of humanity, and signals that something sinister is happening without the use of music to show this.
A Girl’s own story (Jane Campion, 1984) follows a group of young girls who navigate growing up and the various challenges and changes that come with it. It deals with subjects that are difficult to approach, such as teenage pregnancy, affairs, sex and sexuality.
The film establishes its main character immediately, as we see them as their school. The theme of strict religious education is a theme in this film, but when the protagonist is introduced we do not learn their name and the cinematography makes it hard to tell what is happening, as the frame is completely filled with people and it is a close up of this crowd. The narrative is incoherent as it swaps between characters, and it is not made clear where they are or what their relationships are. The themes are also interchanged at random, and sometimes are not made clear.
There is also a swap to an expressive mode of storytelling towards the end, as the main girls sing in together about their troubles. This swap from real and serious subject matter to a more whimsical and expressive way of conveying the meaning and emotions of the main characters is quite jarring, as it is so unexpected.
The main technique that I took away from this film was the final shot, where multiple people are sat in an empty room and looking at the floor. The camera stays near the floor and dolly’s forwards, towards the girl who is furthest away but centre frame. As it moves forward, the people towards the side of the frame move out of fame to slowly direct the viewer’s attention to the girl who is centre frame, and when the camera reaches her it stops, and the film fades to black.
Elephant (Alan Clarke) takes place in Northern Ireland in the 1980’s, , when ‘The Troubles’ were occurring, and follows a number of murders that take place throughout multiple sequences in the film. Each sequence follows a particular murder case, and they all follow a similar format of a mysterious and silent person searching frantically for someone, hiding an object and holding a passive expression. When they find that person, they are shown shooting them, fleeing the scene, and then the sequence ends with the scene focusing on the murdered person.
There is only one word said throughout the entire 38 minute movie, and that is a shout of panic from someone who is about to be murdered. Each sequence lasts a different amount of time, some ending in a few minutes, some lasting for 5 minutes. They use the formulaic time spent searching for a victim to build tension, as wide, open and empty spaces are filled with silence, the only sound being the loud and fast footsteps of the soon to be murderer. The director also uses wide shots and long takes, where the person searching will often be very far away from the camera, to emphasise the quietness and emptiness of these spaces, building suspense as we presume the killer gets to closer to their victim. This time spent searching can last for minutes, which drag on in complete silence, and this is done to build tension, as the killings can happen very suddenly, and when they do, they are made to be very shocking.
The killings are sometimes shown in long shots that let us see the murders happen in explicit detail, and sometimes they are shown through close ups to bring the audience closer to the violence. The receptiveness of the murders gets the formulae stuck in the audiences mind, which emphasises the mindlessness and brutality of the killings. At the end of the sequences, the corpses are also shown in close or long shots, which forces the audience to pay attention to the extreme violence that the film is based off. The film is not fun to watch, as the subject matter is so grim and the execution emphasises the brutality of it all, and the repetitiveness keeps it cycling in the audience’s memory.
My personal favourite aspects of the film were the ways that the camera sometimes followed the killer in tracking crab shots or pans to keep our focus on them, and sometimes would show them walking through large spaces in wide long takes to build tension and emphasise that they may be the focus of this scene, but are not the protagonist. It also makes the sequence where the killer is not shown until the end, and the focus is open the soon to be victim. I also remember the shot where an over-the-shoulder shot shows a man approaching another person, who he has just shot, who is crawling on the floor and bleeding, and as he weakly up and closes the long distance between them, tension is built for around 20 seconds, where tension is built and we form sympathy for the victim, and the drawn out moment makes it all the more uncomfortable for the audience to watch, and the inhumanity and uncaring nature of the killing is made clearer through the horror of the moment.
The Wrong Trousers (Nick Park, 1993) follows the iconic clay stop-motion characters, Wallace and Gromit, in a 28 minute short film where Wallace invests in some self-walking trousers and Gromit is tormented by his new roommate, Penguin.
The film uses pre-existing characters, so does not need to take time here to set them or the time and place up, as the audience is already familiar with their relationship, situation and personality’s. The plot conflict is set up within the first 10 minutes, as the trousers, an important plot device, and the penguin, who establishes the main conflict, are introduced. However the film spends almost 5 minutes introducing the characters and showing us their daily morning routine, which is important as this provides the contrast to what their life, or Gromit’s in particular, is like after the penguin asserts himself.
The main escalation of events also occurs very early, at around 12 minutes into the film when Gromit moves out and Wallace is kidnapped by his own trousers. Since the film is so short, the exposition, conflict, climax and falling action all take place very quickly, with little space between them. Most of the other short films that we have watched have not had such a linear narrative, as they take place over a very short or un-specified period of time, and so they do not even have expositions at the start, such as Connect (Samuel Abrahams, 2010), or do not have rising action as most of the film is spent establishing character rather than comedy or plot, like Stutterer (Benjamin Cleary, 2015). The last 16 minutes involve Gromit trying to catch the penguin and Wallace being made to steal a diamond. Much of this time is spent in silence, as neither animal character speaks at all, so the film relies on dramatic music and animated body expressions to convey information to the audience. The film is also comedic, and most music, situations and jokes serve to make the audience laugh. The plot does come to a climax in the last 5 minutes, where a dramatic and intense chase scene plays out, using physical slapstick comedy that it’s made possible through the animation style to achieve comedy.
I remember in particular the moment where Gromit is looking out of a cardboard box, and a POV shot lets us see from his perspective that the penguin has noticed him, and a dramatic note in the non-diegetic composed score raises the tension of the moment. The penguin eventually moves on, and we see from outside the box that he did so because the box has a dog face drawn onto it, and Gromit’s eyes are essentially camouflaged onto it. This information is hidden from the audience at first to raise tension and keep us focused on what Gromit is seeing, immersing us in his position, but when it is revealed it makes a joke.
When The Day Breaks (Amanda Forbis & Wendy Tibly, 1999) is a 9 minute long short film that takes place in a 2d animated world where animals take the roles of humans, cooking, shopping, shaving, etc. It follows two characters in particular, a pig and a chicken, who go about their human lifestyles and come to meet at a point in the film.
The film uses a unique 2d animation style that is made up of pencil drawings that are all animated together to link up and form a stop-motion animation. There are no characters that we, the audience, connect to. We simply see these people go about their everyday lives, which are normal, except for the car accident that occurs about halfway through. However, this set up does not go far, as the main character it effects quickly gets over it, and the film switches from a dark subject matter to an interesting showcase of a unique animation style. As the film’s focus shifts from the main characters to the various systems of plumbing and electric circuits that connect their homes, we see a rapid succession of shots that outline the wires, pipes, etc. that connect these humanoid-animals. This is an extremely fast paced and rapid sequence of shots that are akin to the soviet montage movement in the way that a selection of images shows so quickly that their content do not convey the meaning, but rather their overall theme. This is a technique I remember from the film. In particular, I liked the shots where wires were followed and shown connecting to devices in rooms and between rooms, which can likely be done without using this unique animation style.
As we do not know or connect to any of the characters, it is hard to feel emotional for any of them, and although the animation style is interesting, it does not keep the film engaging or immersive. It is a fascinating visual art piece, but there is little substance to the plot or characters it focuses on. The film more so exhibits it’s very unique animation technique of pencil and paint on photocopies than it creates a progressing plot or narrative. There is little meaning or symbolism, and the animation style makes the cinematography quite disorienting and jarring at times, making it hard to interpret what you are seeing. Therefore, When The Day Breaks shows how interesting visuals storytelling techniques can give a film a unique and individual style that may interest the audience, but how actual plot, narrative and characters are also important in creating an engaging short story.
Meshes Of The Afternoon (Maya Deren & Alexander Hamid, 1943) is a 14 minute short film that tells a very abstract and artistic depiction of a woman’s dream.
The directors seemed to want to immerse the audience in a very surreal and difficult to visualise scenario, which leads to the film being very abstract and the narrative jumbled. There is no set plot, and events simply play out as the protagonist navigates a very realistic dream in the sense that it makes no sense. Events replay multiple times, which creates the feeling of a time loop, and dutched camera angles, fast, hidden cuts make the actual layout of the house feel like something from a German Expressionist film of the 1920’s, which is done here to create a surreal and express I’ve environment, like something that you would dream up.
Like Connect (Samuel Abrahams, 2010) the film does not use any dialogue, except here this is more apparent as it is a longer short film. The surreal environment and exaggerated performance by the protagonist convey meaning. I particularly remember the use of the first person to immerse the audience and make the film feel more surreal and abstract. I also remember some of the physical ways in which we are immersed into the protagonist’s situation, such as a tube that the camera is placed through when they fall asleep, showing the world through a concentrated and focused view. This and the moment where the screen is actually broken and shatters to reveal another location behind it is symbolic of distorted reality and an interesting technique to create a dream like state, which is what the director set out to achieve. The nun who is revealed to have to face was also interesting, and can be easily recreated in a similar way to make a sudden twist, and the slow and sluggish running of the protagonist also replicates the feeling of being in a dream, as no matter how fast they run, they are never shown getting any closer to the person that they are chasing. This and the repetition of different events and object changing just as they are interacted with, sudden and jarring cameras movements that make hidden cuts between locations make the feel film surreal and dream like, therefore immersing the audience in the protagonists position.
However, the film is extremely repetitive and does not use its time to create characters or plot, only focusing on its abstract and artistic meanings. This is nit something that I would include in a short film, and in a 5 minute time frame would attempt to be more effective with my conveying of meaning and building of themes, aesthetic and characters. This film had more time to do that, but became repetitive through its use of the abstract dream quality.
Connect (Samuel Abrahams, 2010) is a 5 minute long short film that follows a woman on a bus who imagines very unlikely scenarios playing out in front of her as she listens to music, and sparks up a brief and fleeting romance with another passenger.
The film does not have any dialogue at all, which means that it does not set up its plot or characters other than through what we can see through the their actions and expressions. Events simply play out in front of us and the protagonist, and the intensity of events fluctuates as the two main characters are separated by the other people on the bus. There is no actual climax or buildup, as there is little to no communication of the characters emotions or intentions other than through silent performance.
The film does show how information can be conveyed through physical actions rather than dialogue, and the performative dance at the end conveys the main characters excitement through action, rather than narration or cinematography, etc. The film relies heavily on performance and the audiences interpretation of it, and the narrative is not particularly interesting or entertaining. There are a few interesting moments where the protagonist becomes lost in their own reality, but this does not contribute anything to the story, and can be hard to interpret when the character is not set up before hand. There is no context to the character, the audience just has to see what is happening and understand it’s meaning, which is not communicated in a way that makes it clear, as there is no dialogue or set up, character development or narrative progression.
I remember shots like the close up of the two peoples hands slowly touching, as this allows for suspense to be built, and the moment to become more romantic through. The way that it cuts to close ups of their faces and shot-reverse-shots to show that they are building a connection is an interesting technique that I can use to create a romantic moment in my own short film. The sudden flicker of light in the top left corner here was a technique that I wouldn’t use, but it does emphasise the sudden sentimentality of the moment.
The film is short and uses its time effectively, like most short films, to set up a romance between two characters, but otherwise does not establish meaning or characters, and incorporates some symbolism through performance that is difficult to understand as there is no dialogue or character development to explain it. I think the directors intention was to establish a connection between two characters in a short time frame with no dialogue or context, and uses the protagonists imagination to reflect their emotions, which is not entirely clear while watching the film. The establishment of a romance in a short time frame with nothing said is what I remember as the most positive aspect of Connection, but the unconventional ways of conveying meaning did not do the film many favours.
Stutterer (Benjamin Cleary, 2015) is a 13 minute short film that follows a man living in London who suffers from a severe speech impediment that renders him virtually mute, and how he handles the fact that he may be finally meeting his online girlfriend in person for the first time.
I liked the simplicity of the plot and the way that interesting techniques were used to take the audience through it. We can hear the protagonist’s thoughts, as they struggle to communicate them with anyone else, which gives the film a very sympathetic narrator who can give the audience his thoughts and emotions without directly communicating with them and breaking the fourth wall, as About A Girl (Brian Percival, 2001) does. This brings the audience into a close and understanding relationship with the protagonist, allowing us to understand him and why he is making the actions he does in the film, and his coping mechanism to help him through his disability. This was an interesting technique that stuck with me. I also liked the way that he makes “snap-judgments” of people he sees. It emphasises his loneliness and creates a simple coping mechanism for the protagonist which makes the audience sympathise with him. It is also a good way of creating brief moments of comedy in an otherwise gloomy short film.
The film also takes time to establish its protagonist before the conflict that sets the plot in motion. This is important as it helps the audience to understand him and why he behaves the way he does, and when the conflict is established , it changes his behaviour. This change then affects the way he behaves day to day, which the plot mostly follows, his daily life. There is no dramatic buildup to the ending, and no intense climax, just an intimate portrayal of someone in an otherwise romantic situation who struggles due to an unfortunate disability. So the film shows how a plot can remain interesting just through its protagonist and the audiences connection to them, and their development in the short time frame used, and how this can be communicated to the audience in a unique and explainable way.
The climax is resolved, but only right at the ending, which makes for an ending that is partly a cliffhanger, as we do not know what will happen after, but also a happy ending, as we understand the protagonist has worked through the issue they face throughout the film. The use of silence at the end of the film is also a clever but simple use of symbolism that reflects the main characters silence, but also immerses the audience and raises tension as to what is going to happen, but also making the moment feel much more powerful and impactful, as all else if forgotten except for what is important, the distance between the two characters in that moment. About A Girl, Stutterer only follows one main character, but it shows how this can be made to work by establishing a likeable and sympathetic person in an interesting situation, and how the audience can be brought closer to them through intimate and personal narration, and how a detailed or progressing plot is not crucial to a film, as long as the characters are enjoyable and their navigation through it is entertaining.
About A Girl(Brian Percival, 2001) follows a young girl who talks directly to the audience, telling them about her interests, social life, family and dreams for the future.
An interesting technique the film uses is direct communication by the protagonist to the audience. The girl acknowledges the camera and speaks to us, which gives the audience a very personal understanding of the main character. This brings the audience into the film, and helps them to understand the character more. It is also shot in handheld, and made to look like an observational documentary, as the camera is sometimes far away from the girl, and picks up conversations that she has with other people.
The film also cuts back to points in the girl’s day to give the audience footage of the things she is talking about, such as her relationship with her dad, friends, arguments with her mum, etc. This is also done quite clumsily, as sometimes the girl is interrupted by these sudden and fast flashbacks that do not always give important information away, and this is done to help bring us closer to the main character. The film is clearly trying to create a realistic depiction of a young girl living in her circumstances, and therefore uses her narration and footage to juxtapose how she describes her life and what it looks like to the audience, and the perfect moment where this can be seen is the shock ending. In fact, the twist in this film that comes in the last 20 seconds and completely changes the way we look at the protagonist and the rest of the film, is the main thing I remember from About A Girl. It is extremely shocking and grim, which takes the already realistic subject matter and makes it much more serious and powerful. This and the footage taken earlier used to backup or juxtapose the protagonists narration, and the method of communication directly with the audience are all techniques that stick with me.
There is no particular climax, enigma or conflict set up, just the main character describing themselves to us, the audience. I did not like hoe repetitive this mode of communication felt after a few min utes, as the protagonist constantly talks to the audience, with the only breaks being footage taken from earlier, in which she may also be the only one talking. This brought the film down for me, but the film does use some interesting techniques, and also shows how a short film can be centred around one specific character who can involve the audience in their life and therefore, the film. However, it also shows how you can lose the audiences attention through constant dialogue and the lack of any developing plot or progressing narrative, as the film just follows a character describing their life, with a twist ending to add meaning and peak interest but otherwise no devices to advance the plot and keep the audience interested.
Wasp (Andrea Arnold, 2005) is a 26 minute short film that follows a mother who attempts to pretend that her four children do not belong to her so that she can go on a date with an old friend. However, she already struggles immensely to provide for them, and pulling off this stunt causes more disaster for her family than she expects to risk with this act.
The film makes use of its long time frame for a short film to establish its characters, urban setting and narrative. The mise-en-scene immediately establishes where the film takes place and we are introduced to the main character, the mother, through her first actions of fighting other people in front of her children. The main conflict is quickly set up after this event, which was done to establish the main character, and the conflict establishes the lie the mother must uphold while trying to look after her children. The plot leads up to a climax, which is when her children are put in harm’s way by her neglect, which she must abandon her date for to protect them. The plot slowly builds up to this, and the narrative follows the family only throughout this day, and does not use any unique techniques to tell the story.
One thing that stuck with me was the cinematography, as the film is shot entirely with handheld cameras, which make it feel almost like an observational documentary. This makes the film feel real, raw, like its happening right in front of us, immersing the audience. The frame composition is also realistic and cramped at times, with large object obstructing the view, which impacts the audience by making them feel claustrophobic in the pub scene. The movements are also frantic and unpredictable at times, which makes it feel like the filmmaker is following the characters, documenting them. Parallel editing is used towards the end of the film as it cuts between the mum inside the pub and her kids outside. This and the natural lighting make the film feel real and unplanned, which sticks with me after watching it.
The Gunfighter (Eric Kissack, 2014) is an 8 minute long short film that follows a group of characters in a western tavern that are tormented and taunted by a mysterious, hidden narrator who knows a surprising amount about them. The film is predominantly a comedy, as the various truths revealed lead to a comedic scenario and an unlikely situation that mimics classic spaghetti westerns in a format that is slapstick in nature.
I liked the fast pace of the film, which sets up its simple but interesting plot within around 30 seconds, from where events quickly unfold and escalate. The camera movements are sharp and fast, bringing the audiences attention to who and what is important quickly, and the use of the narrator, while a comedic and reflexive device that mocks the cliche here, also conveys information to the audience, but progresses the plot as-well, which is something a narrator does not typically do. This interesting technique and the effective pace of the film sticks with me after watching it a few times. This is created through sharp, snappy dialogue and fast shot-reverse-shots between increasingly aggravated characters, and this can be seen in action when all the characters draw their weapons towards the climax of the film.
The characters are one dimensional, and are also quickly established through the narrator’s information. The time and place is immediately established through mise-en-scene and cliche soundtrack, that establishes to the audience the fact that the film is self aware and mocks the cliches of the westerns it mimicked here. The plot escalates to a climax, rising and falling in intensity throughout as more characters, relationships and truths are revealed, and the plot is resolved through the climax, in which everyone dies. All important information, the crisis, context, humour, characters, conflict and set up are all established through the narrator, who is also an important character and plot point in the film. This shows the usefulness of a narrator for giving information directly to the audience in a short amount of time without having to imply or create meaning through key elements of film form or representation, aesthetics, etc. The film also demonstrates how cinematography can be used to convey information quickly and keep the audience constantly focused on what is most important in a particular moment, creating a pace that fits into a short time frame and how to effectively build up to a climax in 8 minutes with pacing, cinematography and the rapid revealing of information that progresses the plot through narration.
This was the first day of our A level film studies coursework project. We were introduced to the project that we will be undertaking, specifically the first of 6 elements of the production process, research. The others are pre-production, production, post-production, evaluative analysis, and submission.
As part of this stage, we will watch 18 short films chosen by the exam board and write a blog post for each one to analyse it. This will contribute to choosing a group of films that add up to at leat 80 minutes, which we will be using certain elements from to inform the production of our own film. We are encouraged to keep notes on narrative, characters, visuals and other key elects of film form and screenplay techniques. This will also help us practise evaluating our film, which will gain us marks in the alongside the actual end product we will have made by the end of the production process. We will analyse the narrative structure, cinematic influences(key elements of film form, genre, contexts of film), and the creation of meaning and effect through aesthetics and representation in short film.
We were also introduced to the production deadlines and the production brief, which outline what options of techniques our film must include one of, a narrative with a distinctive genre, a narrative with parallel stories, a non-linear narrative or a narrator, and by what dates certain tasks must be completed by. The actual production process, element 3 begins in mid-September. Until then we are researching for the pre-prodiction process, element 2, which begins in early July. I will blog the films that we watch in class and outline elements that I may consider taking inspiration from for my own film, and I will be coming up with initial ideas for my film and what option the exam board has provided to include in it also. Research for the coursework is essentially preparing for how to approach the production process and introducing us to some important concepts that will need to be included in our film and ideas to keep in mind when we come to evaluate them. As the coursework requires specific reference to films where we have taken ideas, we will need to take notes of things that stand out and keep them in mind approaching the production process. “Learners will also be exploring examples of key elements of film form and screenplay techniques during their course of study, which they can apply to their production.” We will be prepared to actually start filing our short films by the beginning of the summer holidays, and up to that point we will be exploring the short film form and what elements they may contain, which ones we may wish to include in our own work, and how to plan, prepare, produce and polish the focus of the coursework.
Cops begins with an intertitle card with a quote by Houdini, which is expressive as it symbolises to the audience the themes of romance and prison. A reverse iris shot takes us into a two shot of Keaton and his girlfriend, keeping the audiences attention on Keaton, who is behind bars. The camera then cuts between a man calling a cab and the taxi driver, parallel edited to show the audience that they are connected and therefore manipulating the audience as they are made to understand the connection between the man and what he was waving at. There is then a long shot though of Keaton sneaking up behind the man to pick up his wallet, letting the audience look where they want, which is a realist filmmaking technique. The same goes for when Keaton tries helping the man into his taxi, but then the film cuts to a mid shot with Keaton centre frame to bring our attention to him looking through the lost wallet, which is expressive as it tells the audience where to look, here, an important plot element. It is also expressive when we cut to a shot of the man in the taxi doing exaggerated shocked expressions and movements to tell the audience that he has realised he’s lost his wallet. The same for when he realises there is no money in it after he has gotten it back.
When the taxi stops and the man gets out, the shot is framed so that after it drives off, Keaton is gone, and the gag is that he has left the man behind without his money, and the man does not know where Keaton has gone too. A fade to black and then fade cut to a new shot of the cab pulling over signifies a passage of time, which is expressionist as it tells the audience information directly, without letting them realise themselves. As Keaton is paying the driver, we cut to a close up of all his money to bring the audiences attention to it and then a mid shot of a man with a newspaper to show that he has noticed all of Keatons cash, which is expressionist as it ensures the audience understands the set up for the upcoming joke. The same happens when the man looks to the right to see the family preparing to leave their home, which the film cuts to, and an intertitle card explains what they are doing directly to the audience, which, again, is expressive.
There is then a vignette shot of the man pretending to cry on the curb to being our attention to his exaggerated and unrealistic reactions, which are expressive and used to give information to the audience that will make them understand the joke. The next intertitle cards explain the joke and we cut to a close up, making the audience focus on the interaction between Keaton and the man. The same thing happens here when the man takes the jacket from the mannequin outside after Keaton steals the horse. There is then a realist wide shot as Keaton begins to load up the furniture but the man comes out and begins helping him, letting the audience focus on what they want to. However, Keaton is still kept centre frame to make him the centre of attention and bring our focus on his confused expression, telling the audience that he does not understand what is happening, an expressive way of communicating the joke.
A fade to black and cross fade tells us that time has passes since the family helped Keaton pack, which is an expressive technique. There is a wide shot when the wife brings out a pair of vases and and a suitcase to Keaton for him to pack, which does not force the viewer to look at a particular thing, but it does cuts closer to Keaton as he crushes the vase in the case, making sure that they see the final gag here. A close up of the address is given is expressive, since it tells us what he is supposed to be doing. The dog biting Keaton’s hand begins in a wide shot, but then cuts to a close up as he is bitten, bringing our attention to the joke for the sake of comedy. There is a wide shot, though, when Keaton uses the punching glove as an indicator, and foe when he accidentally punches the cop with it. The jokes made about police in this film represents the social distrust for police at the time, and the film is shot in an actual real city, which shows what reality was like at the time, but it is not objective reality shown here, which would be realism, since Keaton’s cart is an impossible structure, which is similar to German expressionism, except here it is done for a joke.
There is an iris shot of the gland specialist sign to bring our attention onto it for the sake of the joke being made. There is then a passage of time shown through a cross fade to black, which is also expressive. An intertitle card explains the context of the police parade, but a wide shot lets us look where we want. The same happens when Keaton rolls into the parade. There is also an intertitle card though, explaining that Keaton’s girlfriend if the mayor’s daughter. This police parade scene is a mix of realism and expressionism, as it represents the police force of L.A in the 1920’s, but there is also Keaton carrying an impossible load of furniture on a wagon in the middle of it all. Parallel editing between the cart and the mayor shows his frustration at it, and a close up of Keaton shows his cluelessness in all of this chaos. There is more parallel editing between the terrorist on the roof and Keaton on the wagon to set up the joke of it landing next to him.
We are not shown Keaton jumping off the cart, which is expressionist as it sets up the joke of Keaton hiding behind the umbrella in the panicking crowd. The wide shot here though lets us look around the frame ourselves before noticing Keaton , which is a realist technique. The cops are always kept out of frame before they run at Keaton, which is expressive as it deliberately hides the joke from the audience to make the surprise more comedic. The same thing happens as Keaton walks down the alley with the cops following him before one jumps out in front of him. An iris shot of Keaton sat in the car with a tie as a fake moustache he is expressive as it forces the audience to notice it. The see-saw joke is realist as it is a symmetric wide shot that lets the audience focus on either part of the frame they want, but is an expressive scenario that cuts to a close up of Keaton being ready to jump off to help us understand the joke. A vignette shot brings our attention to Keatons’s disapproving girlfriend, and a wide shot with Keaton centre frame to keep our focus on him, which is an expressionist technique of conveying a joke. The final shot of the gravestone is expressionist, as it makes us focus on the joke of his bizarre death.
The beginning shot in The High Sign is an intertitle card establishing Keaton as “our hero” and providing contextual information, which is expressive. The Newspaper gag is expressionist but the setting is a realist depiction of a seaside town of the time period. Also shot in a long take to make the joke clearer. Keaton is kept centre frame during the cop banana gun joke to keep our attention on him. The man flipping bottles on the beach is centre frame, while Keaton is on the right side of the shot, a realist technique through long shot but only done for comedy so that the audience can see reactions of both men. Long take of Keaton shooting bottles used to let the audience focus on what they want but cuts to close up of man mocking him with exaggerated reactions and makes us focus on him, but this situation is expressionist also as Keaton makes impossible misses/shots
The film uses a realist technique as the man is shot in his back, which is not centre frame either. The man behind the counter is kept out of frame for a comedic jump at Keaton to scare him, which is expressive since it is hiding information from the audience as it is from the protagonist for comedic effect. The shooting range scene is a long shot to show Keatons lack of aim for comedy, an expressive joke shot in a realist technique. The Blinking Buzzards are a comedic/comic representation of gangs in the 1920’s America. An Inter title card gives information on the gang, telling the audience how bad they are instead of letting them see for themselves or come to own conclusions, so this is expressive. The shot of Keaton worrying cuts to dog with meat to tell us directly what he is focusing on, and force our attention onto it. An iris shot on the gang leaders message makes us look at it to understand the message.
An iris shot on calendar also makes us understand more contextual information when it was already visible in the background of the long shot of the basement. Another intertitle card gives contextual information on August Nickelnurser, explaining his character before the audience even sees him, and he is first shown in a vignette shot to make us focus on him and understand that this man in frame is him. A close up on the letter from the gang to August has the sides of the frame blacked out to make us reads the text and understand the circumstances August is in. Another iris shot on August’s daughter is done to show her reaction and pondering, showing her to be an important plot element. A long shot of the gang’s basement lets us focus on anything in frame which is a realist technique, but the cartoon depiction of real gangs through exaggerated performances also makes it expressive. The iris shot of the gang leader shows that he’s impressed by Keaton’s shooting skills and makes sure that the audience notices it so that the plot can progress. An iris shot keeps our focus on the cash in the register to make us see it, therefore setting up the robbery joke. Parallel editing between the dog and Keaton shows the relation between them, but does not a show where Keaton is shooting, just how he is faking it. Expressive as the audience’s attention has to be on whatever is important in that moment, and is not allowed to wander on anything in frame assuming its all visible and in focus. A close up on the cat shows that it is afraid of the dog, which is expressive as it makes the audience understand the correlation and that events are about to escalate because of it. The film then cuts between Keaton and the dog to show that things will escalate via parallel editing, making certain that the audience understands why the bell wont stop ringing and Keaton has to improvise.
An iris shot of the woman brings attention to how she is persuading Keaton. The iris shot of Nickelnurser’s business card does the same. A close up of Keaton stood with gang member behind holding a skull shows us what scares Keaton for the joke. A close up of Keatons shocked face looking at the letter, him looking at camera to show shock, and an intertitle card telling him to kill Nickelnurser tells us directly the bizarre scenario. Intertitle card literally tells us what Keaton has to do and the bizarre nature of it. It’s an expressionist gag as Keaton paints coat hanger on wall and it magically works. Iris shot of banana gun makes us pay attention to it and make the connection to the earlier gag, representing social distrust again of police at the time. There is a fourth wall break as Keaton looks at camera and does the high sign for comedic effect, which is expressionist. A long shot is used when the cop catches up to Keaton, and we can see them fighting and Keaton trying to use the high sign but also the man approaching in the background with a baton. This is a realist technique as the audience is allowed to look at what they want to in frame. Another Inter title card tells us that there are booby traps in home for Nickelnurser’s safety even though we can see that, so the filmmakers are making sure the audience understands the set up for the climax, an expressionist technique.
It’s another expressionist gag as Keaton looks into his tea cup and sees a horse kicking, which is symbolic and conveys meaning to the audience. Not objective reality. There is a realist long shot showing August pretending to be dead on floor and his daughter mourning him while the gang member can be seen in the background congratulating Keaton before leaving. But then the film cuts to a close up on August and his daughter to show him revealing that he is still alive, and she shocked as she looks at the camera, breaking the fourth wall and directly communicating her emotions to the audience, all expressionist techniques. Parallel editing of gang outside and Keaton inside shows that they know he has faked August’s death. The chase sequence begins with close ups to direct our attention to where the action is happening, such as the window shot of Keaton falling back down onto the gang member poking his head out, but eventually cuts to a long shot to let us look where we want. The house here is similar to the one in One Week, constructed in an expressionist way for comedic effect, but shot in a realist way to let us see the whole joke. However The High Sign does cut to close up shots occasionally to break up the long shot to make us focus on important moments, e.g when Keaton finds August and his daughter again, guiding behind the curtains. The gang leader is shown in a long shot as he aims his gun at August’s daughter, centre frame despite the fact that Keaton is in frame, to the right. This is a realist technique as our attention can wander to Keaton pulling the trap door lever, the gang leader holding the gun up, or August’s daughter’s distressed reaction. However, just before this it cuts to a close up of the gang leader and the woman, getting the audience to focus on this dramatic development. The final shot iris zooms in on Keatons hand to show high sign gag, focusing the audiences attention on this one last joke.
The scene setting in the first intertitle card is expressionist, influencing the audience. The next shot is of the sun rising, which is an expressionist technique as it is sped up to show the passage of time, communicating information to the audience without letting them realise it themselves. Then next intertitle card gives context to the layout of the house. Buster is kept centre frame at first to keep the audiences focus on him, which is an expressionist technique. The next shot is a long shot in focus depth which is realism as it allows the audience to look where they want and cut with their own eyes, taking information from the frame without it being told directly to them.
There is then an iris shot of the mirror, forcing our attention onto the man’s reflection and woman’s picture, which is expressive. The film cuts between Keaton and his roommate to show Keatons jealously aswell as his exaggerated reaction, which is a form of expressionism, using unrealistic characters to convey information to the audience rather than attempting to capture objective reality. The camera cuts to a closer shot of the two men to show their gestures and expressions, which is expressionist as it directs our focus onto objects of significance. We cut between one side and the other side of the houses front door, which is done in parallel editing to show that the mans actions on one side affect Keaton on the other, which is an expressionist technique of conveying information although the film is representing a real way of removing tooth. The long shot of Keaton’s tooth being removed is realist. An expressionist close up of Keaton shows that he is healed, directing our attention to this important plot development.
Keaton is kept centre frame when its just him in shot to keep our attention on him, which is expressionist. An iris shot of gas meter brings attention to it. The table with strings gag is an expressive scenario but shot in a long shot on static camera so a realist technique reflecting the widespread poverty of the time in America. There is a similarity to one week in the crafty and unrealistic furniture that is expressionist but reflects the poverty of this time period so its realist context represented in an expressionist way with realist techniques. No particular person focused on here, the film only shows the aspects of the house, however its not objective reality represented here as the scene is for the purpose of a gag. Parallel editing is used during the chase sequence to cut between Keaton and his roommate to tell the audience that both events are happening at the same time. An iris shot is used to bring the audiences attention to the medicine labels, which is expressionism.
There is a long shot of Keaton running around a building to escape the dog on the roof, which is realist as it allows for the audience to look at what they want to in frame. The buildings here represent rural farmland of America at the time, which is realism. The romance between the woman and two men also shows the traditional gender roles of the time. Another iris shot of the dog in Keaton’s one room house brings our focus to it. The Scarecrow shows a realist context of farming in America during the 1920’s, as seen by the maize fields and agriculture technology, scarecrows and huts. A long shot of Keaton dressed as a scarecrow hiding from the men in maize field is a realist technique. The costumes, veichles and technology are realist depictions of the time period as seen in the horses still being used on roads. An iris shot on screw being put on lady’s finger to is done to make a joke but shows poverty in realism through expressive technique. Intertitle card at the end shows that the couple are now married, directly giving information to the audience, which is expressive filmmaking. Cinematography, editing, mise en scen and performance are expressionist and the scenarios are too but represent realist context through some realist techniques for the purpose of a gag, similarly to one week.
Expressive scenario of a marriage being performed on a motorbike ended through an expressive filmmaking technique in the form of an iris shot, directing the audiences attention onto everything in frame and not blacked out.
In the opening shot of One Week, an iris shot reverses and expands to reveal the whole screen, which is expressive as it adds a layer to the film that does not capture objective reality. The first shot of the calendar is an example of expressionism as it directly gives the audience information to contextualise the film, such as what day of the week it is on a calendar. The first intertitle card is expressionist as the text is there to manipulate the audience into accepting the message and to convey the point that the film is making, hinting at the bad events to come in “such a sour echo”.The sound that is added to the film in post production is expressive as it tells the audience when something is exiting or sad, and so on, manipulating them into understanding the meaning rather than capturing objective reality and letting them come to their own conclusions. The next shot is an iris shot with a bell centre frame, the rest of the shot cut out by the black sides of the iris, directing the audiences attention onto the bell, or whatever is important in that moment of the film.
There is then a cross fade from the bell to the newly married couple leaving the church, which is also expressive as it shows that these two events are connected. The shot of them leaving the wedding is realist though as it is a long shot that allows for the viewer to direct their attention to anything in frame, although the central framing of the couple who are descending the church steps to be exactly centre frame shows that they are the object of importance here. So here, cinematography creates a mixture of realism and expressionism through composition. People throw rice at the couple aggressively, which is a realist depiction of the tradition, but the aggressiveness of their throwing of the rice and the shoes is there to be funny and therefore expressive, as it does not capture objective reality.
As the couple are about to walk out of frame Keaton stops to pick up a pair of shoes, which is a gag but also reflects the poverty of the time period. The costumes that people are wearing are realistic reflections of what was fashionable at the time of filming this. And aren’t exaggerated for effect like what would be done in German Expressionism. All intertitle cards are expressive as they provide context that the film itself doesn’t, so manipulate the audience into understanding more. We then cut to a close up shot in depth of field of Handy Hank, which is expressive as it directs our attention to him, and his performance is an exaggerated depiction of a jealous man. The next shot is a 3 shot with no emphasis on any particular character so we can focus on who we want, which is a realist technique. The film is filmed on a real street-representative of America at that time. There is then a cutaway to a closeup of a wedding gift card, but it is shot in vignette to focus our attention on what is important, which is expressive, directing the audiences focus, therefore manipulating them.
There is an unrealistic and therefore expressive stunt as Keaton balances between two cars. One Week often uses exaggerated situations and performances to emphasise athleticism and bravery, which is an expressionist technique used here for the purpose of physical comedy. But this is still shot in L.A, which makes it a realist representation of America at the time of filming in the 1920s. There are no close ups or cutaways or focus directions in action sequences apart from central framing, which makes these comedic action sequences expressionist scenarios that represent the context of the films setting and time period through realist filmmaking techniques. This can also be seen in the cop being knocked out gag, which is an expressionist representation of the real distrust of police at the time in America, done for the sake of a joke here. This is expressive, but is also shot by a static camera in a long shot, which makes it a realist technique. Realist depiction of flat pack portable build your own house gift gag, realist depiction of social problem of lack of affordable housing at the time. Iris shot of delivery man and inter title card and close up on him isolating him-expressive and manipulative. Box is left right way for us to read it as it is opened, which is expressive to give context. Iris close up shot of directions sign to show that it is important plot element. Vignette shot of first direction is expressive as it forces the audience to focus on a certain thing, usually an important plot element in the film.
The shot then fades to black and brings us back to the calendar, directly giving the audience contextual information, which is expressive, showing the passage of time. Keaton’s stunt performed on the plank is expressive since it does not progress the plot at all or present bye time reality, it’s simply there for the purpose of a joke. The gender roles of the couple, the woman cooking and man working on the house, is a realistic depiction of traditional gender roles at the time. However, parallel editing is used here to show that these two events are happening no at the same time, which is expressive as it gives information directly to the audience without letting come to their own conclusions. The cinematography is also dictated by the jokes in One Week, as seen when awe cut to a long shot to get a full view of Keaton falling from the plank, which makes it expressive. There is then parallel editing between Handy Hank and the couple, and Hank’s expressions and mannerisms are extreme exaggerated to show his glee at the trick he’s pulled off, which is expressive as it strays form a realistic depiction of reality.
The house itself here is also constructed for Keaton to do stunts off, as seen when the wall flips and leaves Keatons wife hanging in mid-air, which is in no way similar to reality. This mise en scene is similar to that of German Expressionism, which used exaggerated and symbolic mise en scene to convey meaning and themes. Keaton’s wife also breaks the fourth wall when she swoons over him, looking at and therefore acknowledging the camera and audience, which is expressionist as it does not portray objective reality, and directly communicates with the audience. However, there is then an expressive scenario in the strongman giving Keaton the piano that crushes him filmed in a realism technique through long shot in depth of focus which is a realism technique as it allows for the audience to focus on what they want to.
One Week often incorporates expressionist scenarios for the sake of comedy, such as Keaton dangling from a chandelier, but films them through more realist techniques, such as long takes from static cameras, which allows for the audience to see the whole image themselves and therefore take in the entire gag. However, it also uses expressionist techniques, such as an Iris shot on the wife shouting up at Keaton to bring the audiences attention to important plot points, but at the same time is realist in its depiction of 1920’s America and traditional gender roles at the time, poverty and traditions/societal norms. Each of the little comic sequences that comprise the overall film are shot in static cameras, long shot, depth of focus etc to let the action play out, which is realist filmmaking. But parallel editing is an expressive technique as its a filmmaking technique used to convey information directly to the audience, thereby preventing them from coming to their own conclusions. In the bath scene, for example, the wife directly acknowledges the camera and therefore the audience, breaking the fourth wall, an expressive technique used here for comedic effect. As Keaton runs through the extremely high up door and lands on the ground, a long shot is incorporated so that the audience can take in the entire stunt, but is a realist technique regardless.
There is an iris shot of Keaton as he realises rain is coming through the roof, making the audience notice his dismayed and comedic reaction. This is the filmmaker making decisions for the audience rather than letting them cut with their own eyes. The whole situation of the house spinning is also expressive, done for comedic effect, shot through depth of focus and long shots which are realist techniques of filmmaking. The editing in this sequence is also expressive as the length of shots decreases and the pace of editing increases to increase the intensity and pace of the scene, therefore manipulating the audiences reaction. The wife at the piano is shown through an iris shot to signify her importance and focus the audiences attention. The intertitle card of the merry-go-round joke is literally a joke written on screen, directly communicated to the audience for comedy rather than conveyed through physical action or sequence, which is expressive. To show the effects of the storm, the house is physically altered to look more damaged and deformed, which is expressive as the depiction of reality is manipulated for comedic effect, not showing objective reality in the process. As the couple try to get their house off the railway tracks, there is parallel editing to show the train approaching, which is an expressive technique. Joke relies on our perspective and position from where we’re seeing things take place, position of camera allows joke to work, expressive as it is manipulative, shows train coming one way and makes it look like it will hit the house. The audience cant see it coming from the other way. At the end, you see the real location of the time, which is realism in the film.
Andre Bazin was a French film critic and theorist who was active from 1951 to his death in 1958. He wrote in the popular magazine ‘Cahiers du Cinema’ which he founded in 1951. He believed that the filmmaker should strive for objectivity and refrain from manipulating the audience in any way, rather, allowing them to come to their own conclusions and experience the film in a personal and subjective way. “It adds nothing to the reality, it does not deform it, it forces it to reveal its structural depth, to bring out its pre-existing relations”. He believed that it was possible to show the essence of reality by simply showing it through film without altering or manipulating it into fiction, etc.
However, he did not believe in realist films as in observational documentary that only documented events without any intervention, but rather for the film to select what it is showing. “Every form of aesthetic must necessarily choose between what is worth preserving and what should be discarded, and what should not even be considered”. He said that the entity and whole of the film should be preserved, so that the audience can understand it. He knew that film could not show the essence of reality by simply being as realistic or authentic as possible, instead deciding which parts of reality to show and emphasising the belief that the end result image should be whole and that the fact of reality should be the basis for creating this whole image of reality, which we know as realism in film.
Bazin, essentially, looked for essence in real events and facts and believed that that should be captured and conveyed through film to create a whole picture of reality in realism film. He knew that all films lied somewhere on the spectrum between complete realism and total expressionism, but believed that films should strive for objectivity in presenting an important facet of reality for the audience to view and interpret in a subjective, personal way. Since Bazin was opposed to the use of manipulating the audiences interpretation, this extended to the use of editing, such as Soviet Montage, which was a popular filmmaking technique in Russia at the time of his writing. However, he was not completely opposed to the use of editing.
“Bazin is not against editing which forms the basis of film structure, that is cutting necessary to join unconnected scenes/sequences, but is against optical illusions (superimpositions, dissolves, process shots), needless pedestrian editing within a single scene, and expressive editing that adds meaning through the juxtaposition rather than content of each image. Bazin employs a simple aesthetic criteria for deciding when to edit: anytime two or more objects/subjects are necessary to the construction of meaning in a scene, depth of field is preferable over editing.”
As observational documentary filmmakers attempt to do, Bazin argued for directors who made themselves “invisible” and depicted “objective reality”. He advocated the use of deep focus, which allows for a large depth of field in a shot, making all aspects of the frame completely visible to the audience and letting them focus their attention on what they want, so the director avoids manipulating the audiences. This method can be seen most famously in Citizen Kane(Orson Wells, 1941). He also believed in wide shots so that the audience could look at what they wanted to, such as in The High Sign(Buster Keaton, 1921). This conflicted with the theory of societ montage that had emerged at the the time of his writings, which he disagreed with as it distorted objective reality and it could be used to manipulate viewers.
He had conflicting ideas of the director involving a unique and certain style onto their film, but also allowing the audience to interpret the film in their own way without having meaning forced onto them. He believed that filmmakers should engage themselves with the production process personally because “it is the director that brings the film to life and uses the film to express their thoughts and feelings about the subject matter as well as a worldview as an auteur. An auteur cash use lighting, camerawork, staging and editing to add to their vision.” Bazin argued that the director was the author of the film through their personality and preference.
“This is why depth of field is not just a stock in trade of the cameraman like the use of a series of filters or of such-and-such a style of lighting, it is a capital gain in the field of direction—a dialectical step forward in the history of film language.”
“In addition to affecting the structure of film language, it also affects the relationships of the minds of the spectators to the image, and in consequence it influences the interpretation of the spectacle.”
Bazin claimed that depth of focus brought the film closer to a depiction of complete reality, which would in turn bring the viewer closer to the film, interpreting it in a personal way without the filmmakers influence, but also seeing a film that reflected the directors own interpretation of reality without attempting to inflict it on their audience.
Joseph Frank “Buster” Keaton was born in October, 1895 in Kansas, USA. He moved to New York in 1917, where he was signed to show in “The Passing Show of 1917”. He made popularity throughout a series of commercials and American programs, and directed his first film, Sherlock Jr. in 1924. He did not experiment with expressionism and realism, simply just filming what he thought audiences would find funny, which often involved physical stunts that he himself performed or unrealistic and wild scenarios involving a naive but lovable protagonist that he played.
He became very famous and one of the most iconic actors/creators of silent cinema, as people recognised him for his physical gags, still stature and chaotic situations. His films involved a clueless hero who would accidentally get dragged into escalating situations what would eventually reach a climax, performing stunts to achieve physical comedy and creating sets that he used to perform off of and create comedy through the environment, as seen in the unfinished house in One Week(Buster Keaton, 1920).
Although his career died out after the end of silent cinema, Buster Keaton is remembered as one of the pioneers of comedic film, and one of the most iconic faces of silent cinema.
Cops was written and directed by Buster Keaton in 1922, and follows the usual clueless and naive Keaton character getting into insane scenarios. Here, Buster stokes the anger of an entire city’s police force, after a series of laughable events, and ends up outrunning them through some unique and crafty escape routes.
The film is similar to Keaton’s other films of the 1920’s, except Cops involves more outrageous and unbelievable scenes, such as Keaton outrunning hundreds of cops or catching a bomb and using it to light his cigarette while riding a cart full of stolen furniture, in the middle of a police parade! The film suspends realism to a large extent, featuring impossible stunts and scenarios that escalate into outright chaos, as his films often did, involving physical stunts to achieve comedy and reflecting the belief that cops were unnecessary at the time, including one aspect of realism. The film is not expressionist either though, only using impossible stunts and structures to achieve comedy, as Keatons other films of the 20’s did. They reflect the industrial advancement of America at the time, and follows an innocent but chaos-creating man who the audience can sympathise with in his struggles.
I personally enjoyed Cops a lot! It did escalate extremely quickly and ended up being quite jarring with the pace and lack of buildup to the absolute calamity that was the climax. But other than that it involved some of the funniest stunts and wacky moments of any other Keaton film, although the ending was very sudden and the plot was almost too unbelievable at times. I rate Cops 3 and a half stars!
The High Sign was written and directed by Buster Keaton in 1921, and follows a man in a seaside town who accidentally becomes involves in an assassination plot, where he is both hired to kill a man and protect him from harm. Things escalate, as they often do in Keaton films, and the plot intensifies and the stakes are raised as events become more chaotic and ridiculous.
The film combines elements of realism, reflecting the time period in which it was made, and expressionism, with some elaborate stunts and impossible scenarios that are used for comedic effect. For example, Keaton is working in a shooting ranch in one scene, but then creates a coat hanger by painting one on a wall in the next. It is only used for comedy, but the jokes in The High Sign are more elaborate than those in One Week(Buster Keaton, 1920) and The Scarecrow(Buster Keaton, 1920). In these films Keaton achieves comedy by using exaggerated movements and stunts to make physical comedy in wild, over-the-top scenarios. This is done in The High Sign, but here Keaton also creates a more complex plot with more buildup than climax, as the main action sequence only happens at the end of the film. He relies less on physical comedy and more on the bizarre and wild nature of the scenario that he is in and the outcome of the things he does by accident due to his own characters naive and clueless personality, something that the other films feature.
I personally really enjoyed The High Sign! I liked how the small and silly events escalated and spiralled into a funny and exiting climax, and Keaton’s clueless but lovable character moved through them, hanging on by the skin of his teeth but somehow making it out fine. It was goofy, silly, but entertaining nonetheless. I rate The High Sign 4 stars!
The Scarecrow was written and directed by Buster Keaton in 1920, and stars him living in a single house with a man who plans to propose to the same woman as him. As the film continues, Keaton becomes involved in a number of wild and wacky situations that involve physical stunts, comedy and romance, as things escalate and become more ridiculous as they go on.
The film was released the same year as One Week(Buster Keaton, 1920), and involves many of the same themes. A man, played by Keaton, getting into multiple crazy and unbelievably unlucky scenarios that involve him running away from something, or performing some impressive stunts for some reason. Keaton often incorporated physical, slapstick comedy into his films, as many silent film stars did in the 1920’s, such as Charlie Chaplin, using exaggerated movements and seemingly painful stunts performed by a clueless but lovable protagonist who cant catch a break. The film is fast paced, and once the chase scene begins, it remains exiting and intense towards the final frame. The environment is built specifically for Keaton to run around in manic circles from a “mad dog!”, and the house itself incorporated physical comedy in the way that it is built, similarity to One Week.
I personally really enjoyed this film! It was much faster and intense than One Week, which I also enjoyed, and involves less ridiculous situations with funnier outcomes and moments. It feels longer but is consistently paced, and Keaton’s slapstick comedy and stunts bring a lot to the film. It was funny and entertaining, as films were made to be in the Hollywood industry at the time. I rate The Scarecrow 4 and a half stars!
One Week was written and directed by Buster Keaton in 1920 and follows a newly married couple trying to assemble a portable house kit, when they come up against a multitude of obstacles and inconveniences that end to an interesting end result.
The film is in the romantic comedy genre, and features much slapstick and physical comedy by Buster Keaton who performs stunts and tricks for comedic effect. It also falls into both realism and expressionism as the events in the film are completely impossible, but reflect the time period in which it was made and is not artistic. The film is funny as it involves many unrealistic and over the top stunts and situations that are so exaggerated that they are laughable, and the goofy nature of the film and wild shenanigans that the couple get into make it a fast paced comedy.
The film is silent, and a musical score was composed to be fast and jingle, reflecting the lighthearted and innocent nature of the film but also the exiting and dramatic physical comedy, rising and falling in the mix to reflect emotion and tone. The film also uses sped up footage to quicken the pace and make Keaton’s movements look more unnatural and funny, and also. Heightens the pace and comedy.
I personally enjoyed One Week a lot! I found it more funny than most other silent films I’ve seen. It was funny, innocent, and entertaining, and the perfect length for a short film.
While film was viewed more as an art form in Europe, it became a commercial enterprise in America. In the backdrop of the Great Depression of the 1930’s, the film industry was propelled forwards by aspiring businessmen and audiences who desired some form of escapism. The introduction of audio to films also brought more people to theatres and made more possibility’s for musicals, comedies, romance and western genres, which became the most successful and popular in the 1930’s. Entrepreneurs viewed it as a business opportunity, so film studios were formed and began to buy up the rights to actors and competed against others, and had moved there in the first place to avoid copyright infringement lawsuits by Tomas Edison. They wanted to make a large a profit as possible so that they could invest it into their next film project, making that bigger and more enticing to audiences, to make more profit, and so on.
They aimed to attract as many people to the theatres, which they owned, as possible, and they did this by hiring notable stars, directors, etc, and exercising complete control over the production process so as to keep the final product exactly as they wanted it. Genre films like comedies and romances emerged and became more popular as audiences flocked to the theatres to see the stars, not the plots. Similarly to how slapstick comedies were so popular during the era of silent cinema. Names like Gary Fonda and Marilyn Monroe became known by viewers everywhere, and studios hired these actors and actresses through contracts that prevented them from working for other studios. Audiences came for the glamour of the stories, fantasy and actors, and studios took advantage of this by owning every step of the production process, from production to distribution and exhibition.
The commercialisation of film as an industry led to it being dominated by 5 main studios (Paramount, RKO, MGM, Warner Brothers and 20th Century Fox), and the production of films becoming an efficient, assembly line process, where actors and directors were viewed as assets by the studios, who were at the top of the creative process, instead of the filmmaker or government, such as in Russia or Germany at the time. This meant that films were much more focused on entertainment and attraction than artistic expression or experimentation. While patriotic films did emerge during WW2, there was little experimentation with new techniques, as people made films for money and fame. “Screwball comedy” became the most significant comedy genre in the 1930’s, characterised by fast paced, witty dialogue and containing elements of romance and adult humour. This was essentially the first form romantic comedy, and it attracted large audiences who looked for escapism from the economic climate of the 1930’s. The amount of money that the industry made was used to invest in films with bigger stars, sets, equipment and locations etc. Traditional American values like optimism and courage were celebrated and displayed in these films, taking people away from the Depression at the time and being immersed in the motion pictures they saw.
The original Khuleshov Effect, created in the 1920’s by filmmaker Lev Khuleshov, here’s showing actor Ivan mosjoukine reacting to 3 different scenarios, giving his expression context and therefore meaning, despite it staying the same after each shot and relatively blank. A still shot from The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari(Robert Wiene, 1920) in which these twisted and surreal buildings reflect the theme of madness and paranoia, giving the film a visually dark and gothic aesthetic.
For this part of the course we will be looking at silent cinema from the 1920’s. We will be watching One Week(Buster Keaton, 1920), TheScarecrow(Buster Keaton, 1921), and Cops(Buster Keaton, 1922) and The High Sign(Buster Keaton 1921). We will be assessed on Aesthetics and key elements of film form, and I have looked through past exam questions to see what sort of things will be asked in an exam and what I should be thinking about as we work through this component.
“Portable, digital cameras, digital sound recording equipment and non-linear digital editing have had a very significant impact on documentary film.” How far has digital technology had an impact on your chosen documentary film?
Plan:
Intro – briefly evaluate the significance of digital technology for documentary films and list the main reasons why – portability of digital cameras, digital audio and editing were positive for it. Then introduce Sisters In Law.
Para. 1 – Discuss the opening sequence and pick apart the aspects of digital technology in the question.
Para. 2 – Discuss the aspects of digital technology in the opening sequence.
Para. 3 – Manka sequence. Remember to keep in mind editing, audio and digital cameras are seen in the film and were used in its production tot he filmmaker’s’ advantage.
Para. 4 – Manka Sequence.
Conclusion – Link back to question, evaluate overall impact on documentary film through positive effects on production.
Version 1:
Digital technology has impacted Sisters In Law (Kim Longinotto, 2005)to a large extent. Digital audio equipment, digital camera technology and editing have made it easier for Kim Longinotto to gain high quality footage and documentation of their subject without making any sacrifices during the production process.
In the opening sequence of Sisters In Law, the camera shows the view from inside a moving car, introducing us to the village the film will be set in. The camera used here is steady and captures the view from outside the window clearly, in good quality footage. This is the first time that the portability of digital cameras can be seen in the film, as the camera being used here fits into the back of this small car. The first show we see of the office is a man parking his bike up. This shot, alongside those inside the office, were included in the final film after the editing process because Longinotto was able to film for long periods of time, capturing lots of footage of this village so that she could choose which clips to keep in the film. This is because the digital cameras hold near limitless storage, so that the filmmaker can film for as long as they want, as seen in the opening shot to this sequence, and decide what to include in the film in post-production. The lightweight nature and portability of digital cameras allows for Longinotto to film in these cramped office conditions without getting own the employees’ way, since the small camera can just be moved when needed. These digital cameras can also film in natural and low light conditions, as seen inside the office, without the need of obtrusive artificial lighting, and the end product of the footage is still high quality.
There is also no need for a boom-stick to pick up audio here, since there is a non-directional camera built into the camera. This means that there is no large audio device taking up space in the room, making sure that no employees are distracted by the camera crew since their small and portable equipment keeps them unobtrusive. This non-directional microphone also does not need to be aiming at a specific subject to capture audio from them, and just one digital camera can capture good quality audio from around the entire room without using bulky, heavy and obstructive equipment. Digital cameras are also cheaper than film cameras, so two were bought for Sisters In Law, and we can see this from how the film cuts between them both. This allows for more footage to be captured, as seen here from where the camera cuts from a shot of a woman setting up her desk in the office and answering a phone to a man in the lawyer’s office the next room over. But despite there being more cameras here, they still take up little more space as they are so small and portable. The audio from the office has also been edited to play over the footage of man in the lawyers office, so that we can hear the conversation playing out in one place but also be immersed in the environment from the clip of the office, making us, the audience, feel like we are really there. The digital camera can zoom in on objects of significance, such as the wife who is giving her story, to focus the audience’s attention on them without physically moving the camera and distracting the participants. The compact nature of the cameras also leads to people sometimes forgetting that they are there and giving a genuine reaction to things, such as when the lawyer shouts “That’s what you men do” at the husband, which allows for more authentic aspects of these people and life in the village to be captured.
Digital camera technology has also had a significant impact on the production of the Manka sequence. The camera is small and compact, remaining unobtrusive in the lawyer’s small office as it takes up significantly less space than a film camera would. This prevents it from being distracting at any point for the participants in the documentary, such as the small child Manka, who does not look at it more than once throughout the whole scene. It also allows for Longinotto to point the camera at whatever is relevant in a specific moment, such as the lawyer, who she pans right to show as she gives a reaction to the aunt’s actions. The lawyer’s reaction, a brief moment of anger, was also made possible by the size and portability of the digital cameras, as the lawyer likely forgot that they were there and so gave a completely honest reaction in the heat of the moment. These digital cameras can also zoom, so Longinotto can bring the audiences specific attention to something, such as the aunt’s reaction to what she has done when it zooms in on her face as the lawyer questions her, or in this case the scars on Manka’s back, making the audience feel sympathetic for her and avoiding having to physically move closer to capture it on camera, interrupting the proceedings. The camera also automatically refocuses when it pans right to show the lawyer’s reaction to the scars on Manka’s back, and this shows that these cameras can move quickly, but also do not require professional camera operators to be used and capture good quality footage.
The near infinite storage space on these cameras allows for Longinotto to record for as long as is needed, and avoid interrupting events and proceedings to get a new camera. This is impactful as a documentary filmmaker, specifically an observational one, must avoid being a distraction for the participants of the film and interfering with the way that events play out. These lightweight and portable, accessible and compact digital cameras remain unobtrusive throughout the production process and prevent the film crew form being too involved in the events that they are documenting. The high quality of the camera footage also allows for the scars on Manka’s back and legs to be seen clearly by the audience, emphasising the severity of the aunt’s actions, and the zoom again helps here by allowing Longinotto to focus the audiences attention without moving herself. The long takes in this sequence also show to the audience that the footage here is unedited and untampered through editing, making the film feel more authentic and real.
Digital technology has had a significant impact on Sisters In Law. Lightweight, portable, compact cameras with near limitless storage space allow for long takes and for the filmmakers to stay unobtrusive in the films production, separate from events and avoiding interrupting proceedings. They also film in natural light conditions, and their non-directional, built in microphones allow for quality audio to be captured form all around an area without the need for a boom stick, which can be bulky, difficult to carry around and distracting for the film’s participants. Non-linear digital editing has allowed for Kim Longinotto to choose which clips she would want included in the final film, and what is not necessary, and make sure that events are kept in order and different audio and footage clips can be overlapped to make the film more entertaining and flow better, keeping only the most important clips in the final film.
Version 2:
Digital technology has impacted Sisters In Law (Kim Longinotto, 2005) to a large extent. Digital audio equipment, digital camera technology and non-linear digital editing have made it easier for Kim Longinotto to gain high quality footage and documentation of their subject without making any sacrifices during the production process.
In the opening sequence of Sisters In Law, the camera shows the view from inside a moving car, introducing us to the village the film will be set in. The digital camera stabilisation here captures the view from outside the window clearly, in good quality footage, and prevents the camera from shaking around and disrupting the quality of the footage. This is the first time that the portability of digital cameras can be seen in the film, as the camera being used here fits into the back of this small car. The first show we see of the office is a man parking his bike up. This shot, alongside those inside the office, were included in the final film after the editing process because Longinotto was able to film for long periods of time, capturing lots of footage of this village so that she could choose which clips to keep in the film. This is because the digital cameras hold near limitless storage, so that the filmmaker can film for as long as they want, as seen in the opening shot to this sequence, and decide what to include in the film in post-production. The lightweight nature and portability of digital cameras allows for Longinotto to film in these cramped office conditions without getting own the employees’ way, since the small camera can just be moved when needed. These digital cameras can also film in natural and low light conditions, as seen inside the office, without the need of obtrusive artificial lighting, and the end product of the footage is still high quality, as we can see the inside of the office clearly despite the lack of artificial lighting equipment.
There is also no need for a boomstick to pick up audio here, since there is a non-directional camera built into the camera. This means that there is no large audio device taking up space in the room, making sure that no employees are distracted by the camera crew since their small and portable equipment keeps them unobtrusive. This non-directional microphone also does not need to be aiming at a specific subject to capture audio from them, and just one digital camera can capture good quality audio from around the entire room without using bulky, heavy and obstructive equipment, as seen when a woman speaking in frame can be heard at the same time as a man who is sat outside of shot. Digital cameras are also cheaper than film cameras, so two were bought for Sisters In Law, and we can see this from how the film cuts between them both. This allows for more footage to be captured, as seen here from where the camera cuts from a shot of a woman setting up her desk in the office and answering a phone to a man in the lawyer’s office the next room over. But despite there being more cameras here, they still take up little more space as they are so small and portable. The audio from the office has also been edited to play over the footage of man in the lawyers office, so that we can hear the conversation playing out in one place but also be immersed in the environment from the clip of the office, making us, the audience, feel like we are really there. The digital camera can zoom in on objects of significance, such as the wife who is giving her story in the lawyers’ office, to focus the audience’s attention on them without physically moving the camera and distracting the participants. The compact nature of the cameras also leads to people sometimes forgetting that they are there and giving a genuine reaction to things, seen in Sisters In Law when the lawyer shouts “That’s what you men do” at the husband, which allows for more authentic aspects of these people and life in the village to be captured.
The near infinite storage space on these digital cameras, made possible by SLR memory cards, allows for Longinotto to record for as long as is needed and avoid interrupting events and proceedings to get a new camera or new film tape. This is impactful as a documentary filmmaker, specifically an observational one, must avoid being a distraction for the participants of the film and interfering with the way that events play out, seen in Sisters In Law when the lawyer has an outburst of anger against the aunt who beat Manka. These lightweight and portable, accessible and compact digital cameras remain unobtrusive throughout the production process and prevent the film crew from being too involved in the events that they are documenting by walking around or taking up space, reminding participants of their presence there. The high quality of the camera footage also allows for the scars on Manka’s back and legs to be seen clearly by the audience, emphasising the severity of the aunt’s actions, and the zoom again helps here by allowing Longinotto to focus the audiences attention without moving herself. The long takes in this sequence also show to the audience that the footage here is unedited and untampered through editing, making the film feel more authentic and real.
Digital camera technology has also had a significant impact on the production of the Manka sequence. The camera is small and compact, remaining unobtrusive in the lawyer’s small office as it takes up significantly less space than a film camera would. This prevents it from being distracting at any point for the participants in the documentary, such as the small child Manka, who does not look at it more than once throughout the whole scene. It also allows for Longinotto to point the camera at whatever is relevant in a specific moment, such as the lawyer, who she pans right to show as she gives a reaction to the aunt’s actions. The lawyer’s reaction, a brief moment of anger, was also made possible by the size and portability of the digital cameras, as the lawyer likely forgot that they were there and so gave a completely honest reaction in the heat of the moment. These digital cameras can also zoom, so Longinotto can bring the audiences specific attention to something, such as the aunt’s reaction to what she has done when it zooms in on her face as the lawyer questions her, or in this case the scars on Manka’s back, making the audience feel sympathetic for her and avoiding having to physically move closer to capture it on camera, interrupting the proceedings. The camera also automatically refocuses when it pans right to show the lawyer’s reaction to the scars on Manka’s back, and this shows that these cameras can move quickly, but also do not require professional camera operators to be used and capture good quality footage.
So overall, digital cameras, non-linear digital editing and digital audio equipment has had a significant positive impact on the production of Sisters In Law. They allow for Kim Longinotto to operate with a small camera crew and lightweight, portable cameras that remain unobtrusive andcapture quality footage in natural conditions, with the digital memory card storage capability allowing for long, uninterrupted takes that make it possible to capture unexpected events during production, such as honest reactions from the participants. The digital audio equipment allows for the film crew to remain stationary as they record and captures what is needed, remaining unobtrusive by reducing the need for boomsticks, and the non-linear digital editing means that Kim Longinotto can take what footage she finds most essential to the film and include it in post-production to keep events in chronological order for the audience.
At the beginning of the scene, people are shown playing a football game. No one playing football is paying attention to the camera, due to how small and unobtrusive it is. This part of everyday life in the village was also recorded in the first place due to there being near limitless storage in the camera for footage.
Inside the courtroom, the lightweight cameras comes in handy since the filmmakers using them can quickly move out of peoples way as they walk into the room. The room also has no artificial lighting, but the cameras do not need it as they can get good quality footage even in low light conditions. There is also a multi camera set up, as seen from there being shots from in front and behind the woman. These cameras could be used due to them being affordable and easily accessible to the film maker as, and also allows for them to avoid walking around the room during the trial and interrupting events.
The ease of use of digital cameras allows for her and her assistant to both use one for good coverage of the scene. The near infinite storage also allows for both of them to record constantly, picking up lots of footage and avoiding stopping the proceedings to get a new camera or film. The portability of the cameras also allowed for Longinotto to move into a corner of the room to remain outside of events while recording. The portability and lightness of the cameras allows for her to make delicious on the spot, since she has not planned where to stand or film from or what to focus on. Since the camera is so small and unobtrusive, people eventually forget that it is there, which gets an honest reaction out of one of the men, who jokes about the wive’s husband killing her, which was picked up by the cameras that don’t have to stop recording. This causes Longinotto to have to step in to remind the men of her presence to influence the proceedings to gain a more favourable conclusion.
The camera being used in the Manka sequence is clearly so unnoticeable, unobtrusive and compact that even the child, Manka, doesn’t seem to notice it. The cheaper, affordable digital cameras allow for more to be bought, so a multiple camera set up allows for more footage to be captured. Extended takes can record more footage since the camera cannot run out of film.
A more lightweight camera means that Kim Longinotto can move and react quickly to events happening without her control, and also reduces the need for editing since she can simply face her camera towards whatever is most important in that moment. The long takes also prove to the audience that all they are seeing is real, untampered with through editing, and everything that they are seeing actually happened with the filmmakers adapting to film it, adding to the documentary’s authenticity.
Filming more allows for Longinotto to select the best footage and include it in the final film, leaving out what she doesn’t like. Her equipment is high quality enough to pick out details of the small scars on Manka’s back even without out artificial lighting. The way that the prosecutor loses her temper towards the end of the scene shows that she has forgotten Longinotto is there filming, or at least to enough of an extent that she may break her composure and give her most authentic reaction to the aunt’s actions.
In the establishing shot of the opening sequence, the camera is filming from inside a moving car window, recording their entrance into the village. The digital camera is steady and stable, remaining portable but also with good camera quality. The camera is also able to film in low-light conditions, as there is clearly no artificial light around, but the footage is of high quality, and this long, uninterrupted take is made possible due to near unlimited storage space.
The background and foreground of the pan shot of the village are both in focus, which shows that digital cameras do not require professional photographers to be operated properly and efficiently. The clip of the man parking his bike has been left in the film spot-production, and it was taken in the first place since Kim Longinotto can make long takes due to such large storage spaces. There is also not much space for movement in the reception room, so the small and compact digital cameras allows for unobstrusive filming methods that keeps the filmmakers out of people’s ways. There is also no artificial lighting indoors, but the digital camera quality is still high since it does not need artificial light conditions to shoot in. There is also no boom pole needed since the camera being used has a built in, good quality microphone, so the film crew remain unobstrusive, taking up less space, having less equipment to buy, and can fit in smaller, more confined spaces.
There are also multiple cameras being used, which we can tell from the fact that the footage of someone in one shot is overlayed with audio taken by another one. This shows that digital cameras are more affordable and accessible than film cameras, so more people can get into the industry and create their own work. The small, compact camera also means less people notice and are distracted by it. Kim Longinotto also does not know what is going to happen while filming. Many important events may occur or nothing at all, so having near limitless storage allows for her to film for as long as she wants and choose the best footage post production, and also does not have to stop recording or time recording carefully and risk losing valuable footage because the film camera was off or taking a while to set up.
Digital cameras can also zoom, so Kim Longinotto does not have to move around to fill the frame with certain people, which she does often here, as seen in how she zooms in, from the corner of the room, on the wife who is explaining the story of how her child was kidnapped by her husband. When the camera pans to the right to show the prosecutor, we can see it quickly an sharply refocus on her face, which shows that digital cameras do not need professional camera operators to be used. There is also a non-directional microphone in the camera, so it does not need to be aimed at someone too pick up audio, which is useful for when multiple people are talking at once and it does not take up much attention. The fact that Kim Longinotto is able to record so much footage is what allows for these accidentally revealing moments, like when the prosecutor shouts at the husband, losing her temper and yelling “That’s what you men do!”.
This mind map displays the significance of digital technology in film. It is clear that there are plenty of arguments that digital technology has made the planning, production and distributaries of films more efficient and manageable for filmmakers, replacing film as a more effective and accessible mode of film production.
Side by Side was directed in 2013 by Chris Keneally and follows the development of digital technology. It is in reflexive mode as it acknowledges that it is a documentary, often showing the film crew and the producers’ (Keane Reeves) thoughts.
The film follows Reeves as he interviews some well known filmmakers, such as Martin Scorsese, and other people involved in the industry, such as cinematographers. It gathers these people’s opinions on the rising dominance of digital film over traditional film, and uses their insight and experience to ask questions such as “is film dying” and why digital is growing so much, what it could mean for the industry and young filmmakers, and the advantages and disadvantages of this form of filmmaking. It discusses the past, present and future of film and digital film, and how they have influenced the industry, and henceforth, the future of cinema as a whole.
I personally enjoyed the film. I felt it covered a wide range of opinions and topics and did a good job of displaying the growth and increasing dominance of digital film, and the advantages and disadvantages of that. The interviewees provided useful insight and theories and the film was interesting enough to stay entertaining. I rate Side By Side (Chris Keneally, 2013) 4 Stars!
“How far does your chosen documentary demonstrate elements of one or more filmmaker’s theorises you have looked at?”
Plan:
Introduction – Very brief explanation of observational mode.
Paragraph 1 – Brief introduction to Longinotto’s style/theory and intentions – Manka sequence – How Longinotto’s style can be observed by the audience in this specific sequence (May be split into 2 paragraphs if needed).
Paragraph 2 – Divorce sequence – what signature directorial features the film displays, their effect on the audience.
Conclusion: Show that I understand documentary autership and how Longinottos style differs from others, such as Michael Moore, so briefly make reference to both of their theories.
Version 1:
Sisters In Law demonstrates elements of the observational filmmaker’s theory to a high degree. Bill Nichols described observational documentary as that which simply documents events in a “Fly on the wall” style that remains separate from characters and events, not interfering in the subject matter at any point or in any way. However, Kim Longinotto does not strictly adhere to the unobtrusive style of observational theory, as seen in her interference in the course of events in the divorce sequence.
Kim Longinotto’s Sisters In Law is in observational mode, which means that she keeps her involvement in the events of the film at a minimum and captures events as they play out with our interviews for context. She intends to capture inspiring stories of women who fight against patriarchal and traditional societies that favour the men in it. In the Manka sequence, this can be seen in how at the beginning of the scene, when the man and Manka enter prosecutor Vera’s office, there is no contextual information given to explain why they are there or who they are. Longinotto stands out of shot and records the conversation, but also directs the audiences attention on what is important by zooming in on certain things, such as when the camera zooms in on Manka’s face as the man explains how he found her, bringing our attention to her bloodshot eye. This effects the audience by showing them how small and scared Manka looks, causing us to feel sorry for her. Since the film is in observational mode, there is no manipulative editing or cinematography to influence the audiences attention, but Longinotto keeps certain things in frame to convey information to the audience that may impact their opinion. Longinotto also remains in observational mode as she stays completely uninvolved in the scene, not influencing events in any way, which is an important element of the observational theory. She also keeps an objective stance on things, as an observational documentary filmmaker would, and aims to let the audience come to their own conclusion. But she also shows Vera to be the good and moral character in this situation, panning right to her to show her dismayed reaction at the description of how Manka was beat by her Aunty.
When the Aunty is brought into the office and is questioned by Vera, the camera stays on her, but occasionally zooms out to create a two or three shot of the aunty, Manka and the man who brought Manka to the station. This brings to the audiences attention the man’s disappointed reaction at the woman’s confession and Manka’s look of confusion and concern. These reactions are not scripted, as the documentary is in observational mode, but Longinotto records them to make it clear to the audience that the aunty is in the wrong here and the man and Vera are in the right, demonstrating the element of recording events as they play out, acting almost like a “fly on the wall”, in observational documentary. As Manka’s scars are revealed to Vera, the camera zooms in on them to bring the audiences attention to them. This shows the severity of the aunt’s actions, but, as it is in observational mode, the film does not point out how cruel and harsh this is, only showing the audience all the important parts of this situation so that they can get a full picture and come to their conclusions, an important element of observational documentary film.
The divorce sequence also demonstrates elements of observational documentary film. The divorce sequence begins with an establishing shot of the village to give the context in which the following scene is to play out, only providing information to the audience in the form of visual cues. As the filmmaker cannot involve the self in the film, seen in Sisters In Law in how Longinotto is never in frame or says anything to the participants in the film or directly to the audience, they have to provide information to the audiences through documenting certain things. When we enter the courtroom, there is a close-up of the husband who wants prevent the divorce to instantly remind the audience of who we are following. As the scene continues and the woman who wants the divorce is questioned, the camera zooms in on her face to shoe her fear and desperateness, creating sympathy for her in the audience. Another important element of observational documentary is the filmmaker staying so uninvolved in the scene that characters forgets that they are being filmed and act as they would naturally, without playing to the camera. This can be seen in the divorce sequence in how the men of the court council speak to the woman in a disrespectful way, almost threatening to deny her divorce and letting the man beat her to death. This honest reaction only occurred because the men forgot that they were bing filmed and spoke in a way that they would of when not on camera. This is an important element of observational documentary film, remaining so uninvolved in the subject matter that participants act as they would if not on camera, evoking honest reactions and getting a full picture of the situation for the audience.
Kim Longinotto’s observational theory of filmmaking is very different from others documentary filmmakers, such as Michael Moore, who would involve himself in his project a lot and give his own opinion and try t influence that of the audiences. Longinotto simply records events as they play out and remains uninvolved in the subject matter, allowing the audience to come to their own conclusions, serving more to show and educate than inform and dictate. Sisters In Law demonstrates elements of the observational filmmaker’s theory by the filmmaker remaining uninvolved in events, showing the subject matter in a way that is objective and allows the audience, ultimately, to make their own decisions and opinions, and showing what is most important to the film without giving any context to the audience.
Version 2:
Sisters In Law demonstrates elements of the observational filmmaker’s theory to a high degree. Bill Nichols described observational documentary as that which simply documents events in a “Fly on the wall” style that remains separate from characters and events, not interfering in the subject matter at any point or in any way. However, Kim Longinotto does not strictly adhere to the unobtrusive style of observational theory, as seen in her interference in the course of events in the divorce sequence.
Kim Longinotto’s Sisters In Law is in observational mode, which means that she keeps her involvement in the events of the film at a minimum and captures events as they play out with our interviews for context. She intends to capture inspiring stories of women who fight against patriarchal and traditional societies that favour the men in it. In the Manka sequence, this can be seen in how at the beginning of the scene, when the man and Manka enter prosecutor Vera’s office, there is no contextual formation given to explain why they are there or who they are. Longinotto stands out of shot and records the conversation, but also directs the audiences attention on what is important by zooming in on certain things, such as when the camera zooms in on Manka’s face as the man explains how he found her, bring our attention to her bloodshot eye. This effects the audience by showing them how small and scared Manka looks, causing us to feel sorry for her. Since the film is in observational mode, there is no manipulative editing or cinematography to influence the audiences attention, but Longinotto keeps certain things in frame to convey information to the audience that may impact their opinion. Longinotto also remains in observational mode as she stays completely uninvolved in the scene, not influencing events in any way, which is an important element of the observational theory. She also keeps an objective stance on things, as an observational documentary filmmaker would, and aims to let the audience come to their own conclusion. But she also shows Vera to be the good and moral character in this situation, panning right to her to show her dismayed reaction at the description of how Manka was beat by her Aunty.
When the Aunty is brought into the office and is questioned by Vera, the camera stays on her, but occasionally zooms out to create a two or three shot of the aunty, Manka and the man who brought Manka to the station. This brings to the audiences attention the man’s disappointed reaction at the woman’s confession and Manka’s look of confusion and concern. These reactions are not scripted, as the documentary is in observational mode, but Longinotto records them to make it clear to the audience that the aunty is in the wrong here and the man and Vera are in the right, demonstrating the element of recording events as they play out, acting almost like a “fly on the wall”, in observational documentary. As Manka’s scars are revealed to Vera, the camera zooms in on them to bring the audiences attention to them. This shows the severity of the aunt’s actions, but also influences the audiences opinion, causing them to feel immense sympathy for Manka and anger towards the aunt, and observational mode typically avoids influencing the audience, rather only showing the audience all the important parts of this situation so that they can get a full picture and come to their conclusions, an important element of observational documentary film.
The divorce sequence also demonstrates elements of observational documentary film. The divorce sequence begins with an establishing shot of the village to give the context in which the following scene is to play out, only providing information to the audience in the form of visual cues. As the filmmaker cannot involve the self in the film, seen in Sisters In Law in how Longinotto is never in frame or says anything to the participants in the film or directly to the audience, they have to provide information to the audiences through documenting certain things. When we enter the courtroom, there is a close-up of the husband who wants to prevent the divorce to instantly remind the audience of who we are following. As the scene continues and the woman who wants the divorce is questioned, the camera zooms in on her face to show her fear and desperateness, creating sympathy for her in the audience. Another important element of observational documentary is the filmmaker staying so uninvolved in the scene that characters forgets that they are being filmed and act as they would naturally, without playing to the camera. This can be seen in the divorce sequence in how the men of the court council speak to the woman in a disrespectful way, almost threatening to deny her divorce and letting the man beat her to death. This is an important element of observational documentary film, remaining so uninvolved in the subject matter that participants act as they would if not on camera, evoking honest reactions and getting a full picture of the situation for the audience. However, it can also be argued that these men only favoured the wife in the verdict because Kim Longinotto moved herself to remind them of her presence, having an influence on events and causing them to play out in a way that they might not have without her interference. This is an example of how Longinotto’s personal beliefs can cause her to impact the events in her film in a way that observational filmmaking typically tends to avoid, so the film does not show demonstrate all elements of observational theory, since intervention in events is not something an observational filmmaker would usually do.
Kim Longinotto’s observational theory of filmmaking is very different from others documentary filmmakers, such as Michael Moore, who would involve himself in his project a lot and give his own opinion and try to influence that of the audiences. Longinotto simply records events as they play out and remains uninvolved in the subject matter, allowing the audience to come to their own conclusions, serving more to show and educate than inform and dictate. Sisters In Law demonstrates elements of the observational filmmaker’s theory by the filmmaker remaining uninvolved in events, showing the subject matter in a way that is objective and allows the audience, ultimately, to make their own decisions and opinions, and showing what is most important to the film without giving any context to the audience. However, Longinotto does interfere in the events shown in the divorce sequence, letting her own stance on the situation affect her execution of the observational filmmaker’s theory, manipulating the audiences feelings by showing Manka’s scars in the Manka sequence, and influencing the events of the film by making her presence known in the divorce sequence. Therefore, Sisters In Law does not demonstrate all key elements of observational theory, since the filmmaker sometimes strays from the method of observational filmmaking.
The divorce sequence begins with an establishing shot to contextualise the scenery and environment of rural village life in Cameroon. The scene then cuts to a shot of the abusive husband sat at a desk to remind the audience of this particular case by showing them of that certain character. The court council is shown from Amina (the wife’s) perspective at first, helping the audience understand what position she is in. Longinotto moves around the room here to document the scene, but also remain out of the way of the people, so as to not interfere in what is happening at all. This is shown to have worked when the court begin speaking to Amina in a disrespectful and threatening way, leading them into behaving how they would normally, without cameras in the room, since they forget that they are they. However, it also leads to them playing to the camera, as seen at the end of the scene where they grant the divorce and speak to Amina in a more polite and respectful way.
The court speaks to the husband more respectfully than they do to Amina, asking him what they want as oppose to telling Amina what to do. This shows how Longinottos observatory style works, causing characters to act as they would off-camera, since they forget that it is there. The courts discrimination against Amina is also seen in how the man does not dispute her evidence that he abused her, and they still threaten her that they wont grant the divorce. Amina and her husband are shown in a two-shot as she explains how he abused her, showing both victim and offender in frame to allow the audience to see what affect the man has had on her. A close up on Amina shows her fear and sadness as tears streak down her face, and another close-up as the men threaten her, bringing the audiences attention to the affect that this situation is having on her, making us sympathise with her. After the divorce is granted, the abusive husband is kept out of frame, showing that he no longer has any influence over Amina, instead focusing on her, zooming in to show her happiness and relief at her victory.
At the beginning of the Manka sequence, the scene cuts between two camera, one showing Manka and the man who took her to the police station, and the other showing Vera, the prosecutor. Cutting between two cameras avoids panning too much, instead using simple shot-reverse-shots. As the man explains how he found Manka, the camera stays on him and her in a two shot, the size difference emphasising how small and frail Manka is and also her uncomprehending expression, showing her trauma, and the mans concern as he tells the story. The camera also looks down as Manka in a high angle shot to show how small she is, which gives the scene more gravity as the man explains what has happened to her. It also zooms in on her face to bring emphasis on her bloodshot eye, allowing the audience to see what has happened to her, having more of an affect on them than if it was just said without footage to back it up. Longinotto brings the audiences attention to important parts of a scene, but in the process may have an impact upon their interpretation of the scene through cinematography.
The camera stays focused on Manka’s face as as she is questioned, and this brings to the audiences attention the passive expression and obvious confusion and sadness she has, making us feel more sympathy for her and helping us understand the effect the beatings have had on her. The camera then pans to the right to show Vera’s reaction to Manka’s confirmation that here aunty beat her, showing to the audience her clear dismay and disappointment at what she is hearing, showing that she is a good person. It also stays on her as she makes a phone call, showing her mounting anger.
As the police officers get an arrest warrant for Manka’s aunt, the camera follows them and occasionally shows random people to give a better, more authentic image of the environment that they work in. As the aunt is questioned by Vera, it stays focused on her with only her in frame for a while, showing her increasingly distressed reactions to the questions that she cannot lie her way out of. It occasionally zooms out as she tries to defend herself, creating a two or three shot of the aunt, Manka and the man. The contrast between the man, who cannot even bring himself to look at the aunt, and the aunt who is desperately trying to defend herself from her crime, makes her seem like the villain of this scene, and the man the good character in frame. It also shows how passive and confused Manka is at her aunts pleading, which shows how young she is and, therefore, how cruel and uncaring the aunt is, which is emphasised by how she relentlessly begs for mercy here.
The camera does not cut back to Vera often, only panning right to sometimes show how angry she is at the aunt for her actions. Most of the time it stays on the people on the other side of the table, immersing the audience into Vera’s position, which is done to make her seem like a good person to them. It zooms in on Manka’s back as her scars are revealed, and also keeps the aunty in frame in a two shot to show what she has done and her reaction to it. The three shot also shows how the man is looking after Manka, who looks relatively comfortable with him, while her aunt, who is supposed to look after her, only uses her to try and prove her defence case. As all the people leave the room, the camera pans left to show Vera’s expression of disappointment and anger, which pushes the presentation of her as a moral and just person.
The opening sequence of Sisters In Law is from a handheld camera looking outside the window of a moving car. This shows the rural, African location that the film is set in, introducing the audience to this foreign environment. Longinotto also challenges the audiences pre-conceived ideas of what a rural African village may be like by displaying the dull, overcast sky and thick greenery surrounding the village. There is also some African-inspired non-diegetic music playing over this footage, immersing the audience in this environment and culture. It’s jaunty and makes the tone of the film seem more light and happy, juxtaposing the later serious and grim subject matter.
As the scene continues, obvious, hard cuts are used to show that time has passed and we are getting deeper into this village. There is no contextual information for the film others than the captions showing where it is, to avoid influencing the audiences opinion in any way. The camera pans right to show a dirt road in the village, immersing the audience in the scene by making it feel more like they are seeing these events as they happen, and that they are there. The camera movements are also spontaneous and move as events occur, following participant’s movements since events are not scripted or planned in observatory film.
Longinotto’s physical presence is reduced by only her and a co-director filming. They did not ask people to speak English, instead using English subtitles to keep the films authenticity. No music is played after the initial opening shot, keeping the atmosphere feeling real and avoiding manipulating the audience’s feelings. The crew go around, recording aspects of everyday life in this village to create a sense of place in the film. She also uses zoom at times, sacrificing aesthetic for a useful way of bringing the audiences attention to something. She also stands in the corner of the office to remain out of the way as she records, and moves and refocuses the camera to focus on whatever is important in that moment.
When the film does cut between shots, it is not done to manipulate the audience but to compress the films length and avoid unnecessary scenes that don’t add anything to the film. If the important moments, like conversations go on for a long time, then so does the the scene. The film is also visually imperfect, as seen when the camera pans left to show Vera talking to the husband who kidnapped his wife’s child, and the camera takes a second to refocus. This is left in since the scene is still important for the film.
Every time there is an extended sequence focusing on one of the sisters, Longinotto then cuts to scenes of domestic life in Cameroon to contextualise the film and show more of what the location is like, putting it into real life and immersing the audience, teaching them of what it is like there. Handheld cameras, natural lighting creates a real sense of place, showing more of what the location is and also avoiding spending time setting up bulky equipment, allowing her to capture events in real time, making the film less artificial and staged.
“Longinotto has said ‘I don’t think of films as documents or records of things. I try to make them as like the experience of watching a fiction film as possible, though, of course, nothing is ever set up.’ Her work is about finding characters that the audience will identify with — ‘you can make this jump into someone else’s experience’. Unlike Moore and Broomfield, Longinotto is invisible, with very little use of voice-over, formal interviews, captions or incidental music. As the ‘eyes’ of her audience, she doesn’t like to zoom or pan. She says she doesn’t want her films to have conclusions but to raise questions.”
Kim’s style:
Kim Longinotto is known for strictly adhering to an observatory style of filmmaking. This involves keeping herself outside the events of the film as much as possible, and documenting people from an objective stance that seeks to inform an audience on a particular topic, rather than influence their opinion. In the case of Kim Longinotto, she shows areas of life in foreign countries that are usually unknown to Western audiences, but sticks to overarching themes, such as divorce, as seen in Divorce Iranian Style(Kim Longinotto, 1998). Her films follow people, mostly women, belonging to cultures that have left them victim of some sort of discrimination or patriarchal system, as seen in Sisters In Law(Kim Longinotto, 2005), which focuses on a pair of women who have challenged and overcome a system that favours the men, a theme that Kim focuses on quite often in her films.
Kim’s techniques:
Longinotto’s main approach is to make the people in the film feel like it’s their film, and have complete control over her stories. This is a method of getting people to forget that a camera is recording them, which, as an observatory filmmaker, is necessary for documenting what people are actually like off camera. Kim is completely separated from events, just recording them so that she can get a full image of the subject matter. Her films follow people that she considers inspirational,”Rebellious people”, to celebrate them, but keeps an the film at objective stance on the subject matter so that the audience can come to their own opinions. She does, however, like for people to acknowledge her as the filmmaker because it allows for them to speak directly to the audience, and to not feel like speaking to the filmmaker is unnatural or uncomfortable. “for me that makes you feel like the filmmaker is a kind of non-feeling, non-present person who’s just observing in a cold way, there’s no other way to interpret that. And I think that a lot of early observational films people took that very much to heart, and so if people spoke to them they would get embarrassed, they wouldn’t meet people’s eyes and there was all of that kind of weird thing”.She chose to make films in an observatory way because, she claims, it creates a more naturalistic feel in the production process that captures the more real aspects of life, since the documented people and the filmmaker are separate.
So, she wishes for the people she documents to know that they are being filmed, but also keeps the filmmakers and them separate so as to not interfere in the subject matter at all. Her films are not edited in a way that influences the audiences opinion in any way, but does display the cruelties and inequalities of some legal systems or traditions towards women in some countries. She avoids edits, such as hard cuts, as much as possible to keep the audience immersed in the film and environment, which links into how she attempts to create a connection between the audience and characters so that their story’s are more impactful and meaningful. She makes people in foreign places and situations feel human and relatable by documenting many personal aspects of their lives, which she does through following them in observatory mode. She has said “I wouldn’t call it narration in the way its not telling you what to think. It’s giving you layers, so that everybody gives you their own layer, in a way”. She wishes to get a fully fleshed out and authentic depiction of a subject matter, and avoids filmmaker intervention to keep the events real and uninterrupted, but chooses stories that have impacts on the audience, and educate them on a relatively unknown subject.
Kim’s aims:
Kim Longinotto aims to change the mentality of Western cultures that see her films, and would like for their to be a change in mentality in the cultures she documents, clearly to reduce the inequalities and injustices that exist there. She does not seek to change the laws or traditions, but the mindset that causes such cruelty and injustice in some cultures and/or legal systems. She has said “I don’t like films where I’m told what to think” and “I try to make a film that I would like to watch”, which explains her objective and purely documentation approach to documentary filmmaking in observatory mode. Kim also believes that documentaries are not there to instruct us, but rather to teach us. She also says the job of a documentary filmmaker is to bring out our empathy for the characters, even if they are in an unfamiliar situation.
Sisters In Law was made in 2007, and is directed by Kim Longinotto. It follows Vera Ngassa and Beatrice Ntuba, two women working in the Cameroonian justice system, specifically fighting against child abuse and abusive relationships, attempting to tackle sexism in the country.
The film is in observational mode, since Kim does not get involved in the film at all, simply staying at a distance from the events shown, documenting them without any interference or input. This allows for a completely uninterrupted film, where the audience watches things happening without narration or opinionated input from the director. Kim probably uses this mode here to show what things are like in Cameroon, and let the audience come to their own conclusions.
I also think the film is in observational mode to get the meaning across in a more subtle way, which is that gender discrimination and inequality still exists in some places, and can be hard to overcome. It aims to show the most unfair and clearly immoral parts of certain society’s, and uses two entertaining and likeable people as a symbol of perseverance through injustice.
The narrative, as the film is observational, follows events as they occur, switching between different cases and characters, and not strictly following Ngassa and Ntuba, instead focusing on whoever’s story best conveys the theme of the film, and showing has events can lead on after court. It also does not switch between time periods to give scenes context or explanations, usually documenting scenes that are self-explanatory.
I personally really enjoyed the film. I felt that a difficult to convey through documentary film was approached in a way that was understandable and entertaining. It’s observational approach made the film easy to follow and immersive, even though the events were real and sometimes slow paced. Another positive was how the film did not cut away from slow or quiet scenes, instead focusing on the reality of the situation, and gave an important message through some interesting filmmaking techniques.
Bill Nichols’ six modes of documentaries apply to all documentary films. All documentary films belong to a mode, such as reflexive, and so the theory still apply’s to all documentaries, since so documentary is n to poetic, or observatory, etc.
However, the problem with the six modes is that, while they do apply to all documentary films, documentary films do not always belong to a certain mode. They can stray from them, being in multiple modes at different points. This can be seen in The War Game (Peter Watkins, 1965) which operates in performative and participatory at times. This makes it hard to always categorise documentary films into certain, single modes, since multiple may apply to it.
This is because documentary filmmakers need to make their films entertaining to make profit, as well as making them informative and/or artistic. To do this they need to make their film interesting, and this can involve making it it different modes, so it does not strictly follow a simple, single documentary format. This leads to the categorisation of documentary films into specific modes difficult at times.
Louis Theroux is an English documentary filmmaker who is known for his “Louis and …” films that he made in the early 2000’s, where he met and interviewed people who belonged to a minority and usually controversial group. He also looked into niche industries like gambling in Las Vegas and brothel’s, such as in Louis And The Brothel ( Louis Theroux, 2003), also looking into some more serious subjects like Law And Order in Lagos (Louis Theroux, 2010). His films are mostly in performative mode, since he involves himself in the films to get the real opinions out of interviewees and guide the audience as to what he is doing and he thinks of a subject matter or person.
“The faux-naïf persona he presents is deceptive to the interviewee because it will make them feel like they have to tell him everything from the basics, which is an advantage for the viewer as they will get the clearest picture of the subject that they are talking about.”
Louis’ Objectives:
Louis attempts to get the most honest and unhindered opinions of people involved in a subject, or to inform audiences on a niche or controversial topic that hasn’t been covered in other documentaries. He uses intrusive and personal questions that sometimes slightly story from the subject matter, to try and gauge the personal opinions of the interviewees, and show how large scale problems affect individual people, and relate to individual people. Since the subject matter he documents is unknown to Western audiences. Or he looks into more stigmatised topics like prostitution and the porn industry (Twilight of the Porn Stars, 2012) to show the inner-workings of them, and show the humanity and even relatability in such subject matters.
louis’ Style:
Louis Theroux is known for involving himself in his films to a large extent, often being the most recognisable feature of his works. He is a character who gives his own opinion and asks provocative questions to the interviewees. He aims to show the realistic and personal aspects of sensitive topics like crime and prison life, showing to everyday people what these topics are like for people affected by it or involved in it. Louis also makes assumptions about his interviewees, often to get them to give across their real opinion and forget that a camera is pointed at them. He has also gotten into confrontations with people, and tends to not back down since, as long as he is getting an emotional reaction, he is getting some sort of insight into a subject. He does not take an objective stance, giving his opinion and learning what someone else’s is, usually using his opinion as a contrast to their own and to relate to the questions that audience wants answered. He also creates humour in his films by including the real reactions to some provocative questions, not by making jokes but showing the sometimes foolish answers to his questions and giving his own, real reactions to things people say, relating to how the audience likely feels on matters like Nazism. He does not hold back his dislike for or confusion by some topics, since this provokes the interviewees into responding to his statements and getting the truth out of them.
Louis and the Nazis is a documentary on Neo-Nazi life in California, made in 2003. In the documentary, Louis initially meets a few well-known members of the local Nazi community, then proceeds to interview them and follow their everyday lives, also interviewing some of their associates to gauge their views and the background and personal lives of the Nazis.
The film is in performative mode, as Louis is a definite character in the documentary, carrying out interviews himself, provoking the interviewees and giving his own opinion to them, almost coming across more like an inquisitive neighbour than a documentaryfilmmaker looking for answers. He even goes as far as to make fun of the Nazis at times, to their face or via narration, to add humour to the film and provoke them into reacting truthfully in front of the cameras, which they are mindful to act polite in front of.
Theroux also follows the Nazis around to a large extent, gathering footage of their personal lives, relationships, hobbies and personalities. He also theorises about the real opinions of the interviewees, often asking very intrusive questions and giving his real opinion on them. This is one way that he provokes the Nazis into showing their real personalities and behaviours, and also looks into their actual opinions, at one point claiming that he thinks one person is not a Nazi at all, asking persistent yes or no questions to show how deluded and on the fence they are.
Louis does not seek to get an entertaining film out of the Nazis. To add humour he adds his own insight and reactions to their opinions. He asks the questions he does to get the truth, often in the form of real opinions and reasonings, out of the Nazis, and this often leads to funny moments due to their awkwardness. He also narrates over the clips in the film to show the audience his train of thought, and guide them as to why he is asking such provocative questions. He also puts himself at danger at one point by refusing to be completely honest with the Nazis, showing how far he is willing to go to show the real people behind the Swatsika
I loved this film! I feet it was the perfect length for a documentary, with an easy to follow narrative and humour to alleviate the grim nature of the Nazi’s beliefs. It is entertaining and also gives useful information on the real views of such a controversial and explicit group of people. It is engaging and the pace is consistent, staying relevant on the subject matter and also giving helpful narration from Louis, who alone makes the film entertaining by giving his real views and often irritated reactions to their outrageous comments. I rate Louis And The Nazis 5 stars!
Nick Broomfield is a British documentary filmmaker who his famous for his works on Aileen Wuornos and his reflexive style. Broomfield uses reflexive mode in his documentaries, which reflects on the fact that the film is a documentary, to keep the aim of the interviews in mind as he investigates usually controversial and difficult topics to approach. He tends to directly interview people and look into subjects in a speculative way to find an answer to situations, or bring light on them.
“Broomfield, like Michael Moore, has developed a participatory, performative mode of documentary filmmaking. Broomfield is an investigative documentarist with a distinctive interview technique which he uses to expose people’s real views. Like Watkins, he keeps the filmmaking presence to a minimum, normally with a crew of no more than three. He describes his films as ‘like a rollercoaster ride. They’re like a diary into the future.’”
Broomfield’s objectives:
Broomfield is known for investigating the most real and personal aspects of peoples’ lives, as seen in Aileen: Life And Death Of A Serial Killer (Nick Broomfield, 2003). His films are realistic in their depiction of real people, often remaining casual by simply showing events with narration by Broomfield to guide the audience on his views and context of certain interviews or events. He also remains unbiased on a subject, only giving his personal thoughts to show the audience why he is doing what he is doing, and often interviewing a wide range of people involved in the subject matter to get a good narrative of events and investigate thoroughly the subject matter from all angles.
Broomfield’s Style:
Broomfield usually shows present day events in chronological order, occasionally using footage and interviews from the past to emphasise his point. He comments on his own status as a documentary filmmaker, but also focuses on the subject matter at hand, typically showing events in a way that immerses the audience and keeps them entertained while also revealing facts about the subject. His reflexive style is what he is known for, and is considered as influential to other documentary filmmakers , which shows how famous Broomfield is for his style. He makes comments on why and how he is collecting evidence for his documentaries, and sometimes talks about the production of the film itself, directly acknowledging its purpose as a documentary. This can be seen in Driving Me Crazy (Nick Broomfield, 1988) where Broomfield specifically discusses his role as a documentary filmmaker.
Aileen: Life And Death Of A Serial Killer was directed by Nick Broomfield in 2003, and tells the life story of Aileen Wuornos. The film begins by showing how Aileen was sentenced and what for, then proceeding to show how she was brought up, occasionally alternating to present day interviews with her, using archive footage also to show her trials at court.
The film is in reflexive mode, since it occasionally reflects on its purpose as a documentary . The director inserts himself into the film a lot, almost forming relationships with certain characters and even speaking in court at one point. This goes much further than most filmmakers would involve themselves in their films, which puts the film into reflexive mode. Broomfield is certainly a character in this film, usually getting involved in the course of events to a point where he influences them. But is it reflexive mode since it occasionally reflects on the fact that the film is a documentary, often referencing past films made by Broomfield (The Selling Of A Serial Killer, Nick Broomfield, 1982), and also Broomfield being a participant in the course of events in the film.
I personally enjoyed the film. I feel it did a good job of showing how Aileen had been brought up, and what her personal and often disturbing thought process was. It provided interesting insight into a serial killer’s psyche and their motives, not focusing so much on their actions but the reasons for them and the consequences for them. Though the narrative was a bit incoherent at times, I still understood the whole picture, and feel like I learned about the life and death of a serial killer. I rate Aileen: Life And Death Of A Serial Killer 4 and a half stars!
Peter Watkins is an English filmmaker who is known for making documentary films that depict dystopian futures that reflect issues in modern day society. His most famous work reflects his style perfectly, The War Game, 1965, which depicts how the English government had prepared for a nuclear explosion in England.
“Watkins established his reputation with two docu-dramas from the 1960s, *Culloden* and *The War Game*. Both document events from the past using actors and reconstruction. In asking questions of conventional documentary, Watkins reflects his deep concern with mainstream media, which he has called the ‘monoform’.”
Watkins’ objectives:
Watkins usually depicts such grim and pessimistic views of the future of society to reflect issues prevalent in modern day society. His films are typically violent and explicit in their depiction of chaos and brutality to emphasise the danger of society reaching such a point. They also remain somewhat rooted in reality, featuring real countries and theorising how current governments may handle certain situations, typically to push anti-war slogans, as seen in The War Game. He does this by focusing on the real human suffering that would be caused by warfare and the indirect consequences of warfare, as is clear in punishment Park, 1971.
Watkins’ style:
Watkins does not focus on particular characters. Rather, groups in society affected by warfare. This shows how everyone would be affected by war, inducing fear in the audience, to an extent, to emphasise the brutality of war, and what it could lead to. Of course, he mostly doesn’t cover real disasters, but fictional ones that represent certain atrocities or crimes that happened in real history. Watkins’ depiction of nightmarish future scenarios are typically direct mirroring of real tragedies, e.g the Hiroshima nuclear explosion in The War Game, which further pushes the point that just because the tragedy didn’t happen toyou,itcan. His style is not fear mongering, but rather accurately depicting what society would look like, should another significant war break out.
The War Game was directed in 1965 by Peter Watkins. It depicts how the British Government would operate in the event of a nuclear explosion in England. The documentary is in participatory mode since it simply shows the events occurring with out any interference from the filmmaker, who does interview people involved in the events to show how they are reacting to it. The filmmaker exists to guide the audience through the events, remaining outside of the film except to document the events via footage or interviewing people.
The film follows the events leading from the initial explosion, switching between different groups of people, such as children and police officers, to show how government officials would handle the situation and how that would affect ordinary citizens. The purpose of the film is not just to scare people and show what the government had planned, but to show the full extent of how nuclear war would impact and change British society and ordinary people who had no part to play in the explosion. The film also tells, through narration, what the initial and long-term impacts of a nuclear explosion would be, and how the explosion itself works to cause chaos and affect people.
The film is significant since it uses the real examples of nuclear explosions to predict what it would look like to show the British people. It represents a height in the tension of The Cold War, and just how prepared the government was for nuclear disaster. Perhaps that is partly why the film is so violent and intense, to evoke the experience3 of being affected by such an explosion.
I personally enjoyed the film. I felt it told an accurate and unrelenting prediction of what a nuclear explosion would be like, and some of the methods of showing it, such as interviewing people and showing how individual groups would be affected, was an interesting and effective way of telling the story. My only problem with it was that at times the performances were not very believable, but I suppose the film can’t be faulted for that as it was made in the 1960’s. I rate The War Game 4 stars!
Michael Moore is an American filmmaker who is known for criticising the U.S government for it’s inadequacies through performative documentary. He often inserts himself into his films to get his opinion across, and is recognisable for his humour in tackling real issues, often using sarcasm and rhetoric to mock the subject material and also inserting real examples of tragedy to emphasise his point.
“Moore, like Broomfield, is a very visible presence in his documentaries, which can thus be described as participatory and performative. His work is highly committed — overtly polemical in taking up a clear point of view, what might be called agit-prop documentary. He justifies his practice in terms of providing ‘balance’ for mainstream media that, in his view, provides false information. Part of Moore’s approach is to use humour, sometimes to lampoon the subject of his work and sometimes to recognise that documentaries need to entertain and hold an audience.”
Michael’s Objectives:
Moore often attacks U.S administration through his films, inserting his left-wing views to balance information since he believes mainstream media provides false information. He has attacked the American healthcare system, gun legislation, foreign policy and specific government officials like George Bush and members of Congress, as seen in Fahrenheit 9/11 (Michael Moore, 2004).
Michael’s style:
Michael uses performative mode for his documentaries. This is sene in how he inserts himself as a narrator, which he does to make sarcastic and mocking commentary of the subject, and also through direct involvement, such as interviewing members of Congress unexpectedly on the street. He does this to make fun of the subject, but also uses archive footage to provide context, and usually leaves himself out of the film when the more serious subject matter, such as the Iraq War, is being shown. This emphasises the dark nature of the subject he is documenting, and helps to get his points across and justify his humour. He is not making fun of the actual tragedies he bases his criticisms off to show how problems in the U.S law accumulate, but rather making fun of the government for being so disconnected to the problems their country has. This has marked Moore as a distinct and unique filmmaker for giving his views in a un-relenting and persuasive way, while also making his films entertaining and emphasising his points through humour on an otherwise grim subject matter.
Fahrenheit 9/11 is a documentary film made by Michael Moore that exposes the flaws in President W. Bush’s handling of the tragedy of September 11th. The film is in performative mode, since it features Moore as a direct influence on the people interviewed, he gives his own story and opinion on Bush, and often uses archive footage and protests to display his goal in bringing the President’s failures to light.
The film follows the events that took place after September 11th, 2001, and mainly focuses on Bush specifically and the way that he handled the crisis. However, it also cuts to periods before Bush’s election to explain the context of his career and the way he handled foreign policy after 2001. It also cuts from America to Iraq to show the atrocities of the war, occasionally cutting back to show what Bush was saying to justify the war, and bring to the audience’s attention how insensitive he was to the war crimes he was committing.
The documentary, despite involving such heavy material, has a relatively comedic style. This is done by Moore making fun of the government themselves and using performance and music to mock their actions. This is another example of how Moore inserts himself into the film and makes it performative mode, but the film also focuses on the atrocities and grim situation of war with a much more mature tone to emphasise the awfulness of it, mixing it with clips of Bush to show how disconnected he was from his own war.
Fahrenheit 9/11 accurately shows the disturbing subject matter of Bush’s presidency while also making light humour of his failures and crimes. It uses interviews to effectively show the disillusionment of Congress and the view of the soldier’s on the ground and people watching the news from home. It is memorable and funny, but serious where it is appropriate and very informative on just how corrupt Bush’s presidency was. Despite this, I often found the film hard to follow due to the fast narration and non-linear narrative, and the interviews sometimes took fast-paced to process. The amount of names to remember was also confusing at times, so while I found the film entertaining and informative, I also found it difficult to follow at times and hard to process. I rate Fahrenheit 9/11 3 and a half stars!
The film is about a mail delivery service that runs via railway from around the UK. It is a poetic documentary that is used to advertise the efficiency of the railway messenger service. It is in poetic mode due to the poem read out at the end that symbolises the usefulness of the train, and throughout the rest of the film the inner-workings of the railway and postal service is shown to display why it is an effective business. The poem is done to describe the efficiency of the service through a light-hearted and flowing prose.
Blackfish is a documentary by Gabriel Cowperthwaite, made in 2013, that shows the inner-workings of the sea park industry, namely the cruelty shown towards orca-whales in sea parks and how this changes their behaviour. The documentary swaps between cases of orca violence, but mostly follows Tilikum as an example of how captivity can cause violent tendencies in killer-whales that can, and has, led to fatal accidents.
The narrative of the story follows the life story of Tilikum, mainly focusing.on his capture, movement between sea parks, and the accidents he was involved in. The film does occasionally swap to other orca’s being kept in captivity, using the instances if violence they showed towards trainers as evidence of how captivity can alter behaviour patterns in orca-whales. The documentary also includes. Interviews with trainers, fishermen, SeaWorld managers and witnesses to show different sides of the story and help describe events as they happened.
Tilikum
The film holds a significant place in documentary film history as it has brought light onto a relatively niche industry and links it to modern day activism against animal cruelty. It made $2.3 million in the box office and was shown on Netflix, so has gained notoriety in the documentary genre.
I personally liked the film. I found it a very interesting insight on how Orca-whales are effected by captivity and how harsh life is for those that have been captured. The film also effectively focuses not on the violence the whales could exhibit, but rather the causes foe it and how the industry treats these animals, keeping the point of the film constantly, only showing the violence to such a degree to emphasise the industry’s effect on the whales. I also found the scenes involving more violent moments very harrowing, as they were described and shown in ways that effectively impacted the audience and conveyed the danger and un-naturalism in the behaviour of some orca’s. My only problem with the film is that sometimes it is confusing when a killing happens, and what whales are being described, and even the course of events, due to the narrative switching so often between places and whales. By the end of the film, I was not actually sure how many people Tilikum had killed, and septic that not being the purpose of the film, it still left me feeling unsure about the whale the film had focused on so much.
The film is a participatory documentary, since it interviews people who were involved in Tilikum’s life and uses archive footage to accompany the narration of the interviewed.
The traditional form, using a voice-over/presenter to directly address viewers and discuss a particular subject matter. Also known as ‘the voice of god’. How we most often think of a documentary. Emphasises verbal commentary and argumentative logic, usually through a narrator. It follows a logical argument and it offers a right or ‘proper answer. David Attenborough nature documentaries is what Nichols would call expository, as facts are presented to us, the audience.
Observational documentaries:
Aims to show every-day life, un-obstructed by the filmmaker. Also known as ‘window on the world’. Cinema Verity emerged in the late 1950s-early 1960’s. This attempted to capture objective reality. So the filmmaker is a neutral observer of real life. They remain hidden behind the camera and is ignored, neither changing or influencing the events being captured. Since nothing is staged for the camera, it rushes to keep up with the action, often resulting in rough, shaky footage. Sometimes known as ‘fly on the wall’ documentary. This would be something like ‘police interceptors’.
Participatory documentaries:
Unlike observational, participatory mode has direct engagement between the filmmaker and the subjects, so the filmmaker becomes parts of the events being recorded. Their impacts on the events being recorded is acknowledged, and that could even be the point of it. Where the person making the documentary is pat of the documentary. Reggie Yates is a participatory filmmaker, where their personality is a part of the film.
Performative documentaries:
Emphasises the subject nature of the documentarian as-well as acknowledging the subjective reading of the audience. In a performative documentary, the documentary filmmaker is kind of the point. Such as Louis Theroux. The result is because he is interviewing them, provoking reactions, making the interview go a certain way. Emphasises the emotional impact on the audience.
Poetic documentaries:
Poetic mode is where moves away from objective reality to tray and grasp at “an inner truth”. It favours mood, tone and texture over accurate representations. It is literally poetic or metaphorical in its representation of something.
Reflexive documentary:
Reflexive mode is where Acknowledges the constructed nature of documentary and sort of flaunts it, in a way. A reflexive documentary offers a truth rather then the truth. Sometimes used for when the absolute truth of a situation can’t be known, e.g the last hours of Hitler’s life. The location could be exactly correct, but the dialogue could only be an approximation.
The dictionary definition of documentary is “Consisting of or based on official documents” and “Using pictures or interviews with people involved in real events to provide a factual report on a subject”.
Realism is presented in documentary films to show the audience real events that have happened and serve as an educational piece of media. Fiction films can portray real events, but can stray from realism if it suits their purposes, which are more so for entertainment than education .
Bill Nichols describes all films as documentaries, some are ‘wish fulfilment’ in the sense that they create fiction, and others are ‘social representation’, which are usual documentaries intended to serve as a documentation of real events.
The difficulty in differentiating between fiction and documentary films is something that Nichols also described. He explained that all films, whether fiction or not, were documentaries in the sense that they showed the climate, environment and culture in which they were produced.
There are fiction and pure documentary on a conceptual scale. At one end, there is fiction film made purely for entertainment, and on the other, pure documentary made to discuss and educate audiences on a particular topic. In between, there is a grey area. This is because it can be, according to Bill Nichols’s teachings, difficult to differentiate between fiction and documentary film, as all films are technically documentaries, so there is no clear distinction between them which creates a grey area on the scale.
There are many differences in the key aspects of film form between fiction films and documentary films. This table lists those differences.
Fiction Films:
Mise-en-scene is real or ‘fake’ to create the film.
Characters are real or invented purely for the film but are mostly played by actors.
Equipment is hidden from the audience to create the film.
Filmmaker is a director who is in charge of the creative process but not in the film.
Narrative follows people in the film, can be changed to suit the filmmakers wants.
The audience will accept the reality of the film, fiction or not. These films want to attract the broadest possible audience who want to be entertained.
Fictional film usually has a higher budget than documentary film.
Environment is invented for the film or shot on set but put into fictional context for film. Environment can be real and set in real location too.
Documentary Films:
Mise-en-scene is real and used to create the film.
Characters are usually played by real people, interviewed for their involvement in the subject matter.
Equipment is shown to exhibit the reality of the documentary.
Filmmaker creates the film but can be shown on screen/be part of the film.
The narrative follows real events and must be concise to make the subject matter clear and understandable.
Attract a niche audience who want to learn about a subject band not necessarily be entertained, and know that the film is showing real events.
Documentary film usually has a lower budget than fiction film.
Environment is real in documentary film and used for a specific purpose.
I have looked through the course overview. We are going to be watching Sisters In Law, study 3 key sequences from it, and in this specific part of the course we are going to be tested on specialist subject areas. These are critical debates, digital technology and filmmakers’ theories. I have also looked over the past exam questions, so have a general idea oh how the study ares may come into an exam in this part of the course. I have also looked over the assessment objectives and core study areas that will apply to this side of the course.
“How far do each of the films that you have studied represent key characters in ways that reinforce or challenge the audiences expectations?”
Plan:
Introduction – overview how men and women are reflected in how Romina and Ariel act, then describe how the way they act reinforces our expectations but goes on to challenge them later on.
1 – Describe how Ariel and the chef is represented in a way that reinforces our expectations.
2 – Describe how they are represented in ways that challenge our expectations.
3- Describe how Romina and Ariel’s mistress are represented in ways that reinforce expectations.
4 – Describe how they are represented in ways that challenge expectations.
Conclusion – Summarise previous points and explain, link to overall question.
Version 1:
Wild tales represents key characters, who are used to symbolise the groups of men and women, in ways that, at first, reinforce audience expectations. However, as the film goes on, these representations change in ways that communicate themes of revenge and taking power by challenging audience expectations.
As one theme of the wedding sequence is gender inequality, the key male characters in that scene, Ariel and the chef, are at first represented in ways that reinforce the audiences expectations. Through performance, Ariel is extremely happy and exited during the wedding, with a wide grin on his face and happily greeting his friends. He carries himself in a proud and confident demeanour, and we see him touch his mistress, which shows his audacity and belief that he can get away with anything. His power complex and smugness are emphasised by Romina’s hopeless and distraught expression, amplifying the psychological damage that his actions have had on her. His costume is also extremely straight and tidy, showing his obsession with his appearance, and he is never shown at eye-level when in frame with Romina, showing his how he has taken advantage of her and gotten away with it. The chef is different, and at first challenges the audiences expectations by being kind and comforting to Romina, as seen in how he is kept eye-level; with her when in frame together, but his seemingly sentimental attitude is shown to be a rouse when he is seen leaking his story to his co-workers. This representation reinforces audience expectations of the character as he is a male, and the lack of many other male characters in this scene and Ariel’s affair show that a clear theme of this story is negative masculinity and gender inequality.
As the story goes on though, Ariel begins to be represented in a way that challenges audience expectations. His proud and perfect demeanour fade away into panic as he pleads with Romina to remain happy until the end of the wedding, and his facade completely cracks and a terrified expression comes onto his face. He also leans down as he pleads with her. This reflects how she is already bringing him down to her level, and he is spiralling in his attempt to maintain his perfect appearance, and is willing to try and emotionally manipulate her, like the chef does, to make it seem like he has a perfect and happy marriage. By the end of the story, Ariel has completely lost all composure, letting go of his proud and independent masculine demeanour, being cradled and comforted by his mother. He is below Romina’s eye level here, his previously perfect uniform is disheveled and he is is in a mess of tears, showing that she has completely won over him and he no longer has any power over her, and she has taken revenge. This representation challenges audience expectations by contrasting how we expect Ariel to act from the way that he is built up as a proud and masculine figure, certain in himself and exploitative of his wife’s ignorance. So, seeing him represented as weak and fragile challenges our expectations.
Romina, a key character, is a reflection of women who are exploited by un-faithful husbands, which creates the expectation of her being timid and weak. She is at first represented in a way that reinforces the audiences expectation through cinematography and performance. At the beginning of the scene, Romina is extremely exited and has an almost plastic grin plastered onto her face. This obviously exaggerated emotion portrays her as ignorant and perhaps even gullible, which we would expect from how Ariel also acts like a stereotypical male. She is also represented as hopeless and emotionally devastated when she realises that her husband has had an affair, as she is shown in an extreme close up, with an panicked expression and everything else other than her face out of focus, reflecting her feeling of isolation and helplessness in that moment. This represents Romina as a weak and fragile character, and continues as she flees the party in a desperate panic attack, crying and breaking down as she runs away. This makes us sympathise with her as she is obviously distraught, but also reinforces our expectations, as so far she has been represented as naive, so an emotional shock like ethics would have such an expected impact on her.
However, Romina is also presented in ways that challenge the audiences expectations, to a large extent too. As Romina threatens to ruin Ariel’s life on the roof, her sadness transforms into anger and fuelled obsession as she screams with hate, and looks down her nose at him. Here, Ariel is also shown to be panicked and terrified by her outburst, showing that she is growing to stand up for herself, surprising the audience as it is such a sudden change in the couples power dynamic. As the wedding sequence continues, Romina assumes more influence over Ariel, which challenges audience expectations to a large extent. She is kept above his eye-level, reflecting her new-found power over him, and her previously beautiful and white dress is now spattered with blood and her make-up ruined by tears. This change in her previously perfectly organ used demeanour and appearance reflects her change in personality and sudden obsession with revenge, abandoning public image in favour of ruining Ariel’s life as he ruined hers. This sudden seizure of power and independence is a drastic change from the giddy and over the top performance and perfect appearance of Romina at the start of the story challenges the audiences expectations of how Romina acted as a character.
Wild Tales represents key characters in ways that initially reinforce audience expectations, but as power dynamics change and the themes of the story become more clear, our expectations are challenged to a far extent. Characters fit or stray from audience expectations through cinematography, performance and mise-en-scen, and these reflect the changes in their character from how they were introduced at the beginning of their arcs, and from that they are represented in ways that heavily reinforce audience expectations and ways that suddenly challenge them as a character progresses and changes.
“Discuss how aesthetics are used to communicate themes in Wild Tales. Make detailed reference to particular sequences in your answer”.
Essay Plan:
Introduction – Each story has its own aesthetic. Mention this then talk about how each one communicates the theme intended in each story.
Middle – Talk about wedding sequence. Talk extensively about the techniques used, how they communicate themes, what said themes are. After two paragraphs move onto diner sequence, and talk about how aesthetic differs from previous one, and repeat process.
Conclusion- Explain how both sequences use their individual aesthetics communicate their individual themes.
Version 1:
Each individual story in wild tales has its own specific aesthetics that are used to communicate the themes of each story, which differ form the others. Cinematography, mise-en-scen, performance and sound all combine to create the aesthetic, and through these the themes of each story can be inferred.
The wedding story has a clear aesthetic that sets it apart from the other story’s. The sequence begins with an extremely large and filled wedding party, adorned with expensive furniture and decorations. The mise-en-scen here gives the scene a clear opulent aesthetic, communicating the story’s theme of wealth. When the newly-weds enter the scene, the camera pushes in on them and keeps them centre frame to symbolise that they are the centre of attention and events, as is also shown through the lavish red carpet they walk in on, and the crescendo in the diegetic compiled score. When they reach their family and friends, the couple immediately separate and talk to their individual groups. We see, through performance, the couple seem extremely happy, and they have almost plastic seeming smiles on and act in stereotypical ways, perhaps as they would be expected to act at a wedding. The bride screams in joy as she runs up to her friends, and the groom shakes hands and laughs with his friends. The characters act as if their movements and expressions are completely scripted, which gives the scene an aesthetic where the characters do not act as themselves. The couples obvious separation is also shown from the shot-reverse shots between the bride and groom, whose backs are facing each other. This communicates the theme of superficiality in the story, but more specifically the couple’s fake affection for each other, which is apparent in how they never speak to each other with actual respect or adoration throughout the entire scene.
The entire ballroom is filled with flashing lights and bright and dark costumes. The contrast in the mise-en-scen and cinematography is extremely sharp, symbolising the differences between how the men and women act in this story, communicating the theme of gender inequality. This is also shown through how Romina, the bride, is kept at eye level throughout the scene, whilst her husband, Ariel, whenever in frame with her, is shown as above her via low-angle shots. This represents his expectation of being a stronger figure than his wife, playing into the theme of gender inequality. Romina’s inability to stand up to the actions of her husband are also shown when she calls his mistress, which is shown through a shot where Romina is stood in the backdrop of the shot, whilst the woman is at the front, far from her, symbolising Romina’s weakness and helplessness. This is shown to have changed at the end of the story when Ariel begins to break down, letting go of his happy and perfect facade, crying and curling up into a ball on the floor. He is then shown as beneath Romina, as the camera looks up at her from a low-angle shot, showing how she now stands over him, communicating the theme of overcoming gender stereotypes and taking power, the story arch that Romina goes through.
The theme of superficiality is also shown through the scenes tense and uncomfortable aesthetic, which is accomplished through sound as-well as performance. This is seen at the end of the scene when Romina re-enters the ballroom and the music stops playing. All of the guests and Ariel have concerned expressions on their faces as they watch on at the scene Romina is making, and this sharp contrast from their previous joy emphasises the seriousness of the moment, and communicates the theme of superficiality, combined with the lack of music that symbolised the attempt at hiding the couples obvious disdain for each other. The couple lavished their wedding in expensive jewellery and furniture and loud music and happy faces, a combination of sound, performance and mise-en-scen, as when these all take a sharp contrast to make the scene feel more serious, it communicates the theme of superficiality being broken by revenge and obsession.
The theme of revenge is communicated through mise-en-scen and performance and cinematography, which give the scene a violent and brutal aesthetic. At the beginning of the scene, Ariel towers over his wife, grinning madly knowing that he has gotten away with cheating on her. As Romina becomes aware of his actions and exposes him, she becomes more loud, clumsy and out-going, whilst Ariel beds down to be eye-level with her, and his voice becomes evidently uncomfortable and panicked. At the end of the scene, Romina stands above her husband, staring down at him, and is shown to have won over him through the low-angle shot of her looking at him. Her dress is also covered in blood, symbolising how her wedding, and chance at a perfect, happy, if pretend, life has been ruined by her obsession with revenge. Ariel’s costume also becomes rugged and messy here, symbolising him letting go of his facade of happiness in his panic and desperation to keep Romina quiet and submissive to him. When Romina spins around with Ariel’s mistress, she and her are kept in focus, whilst everything else is kept out of focus. This represents Romina’s obsession with getting revenge on the woman who ruined her marriage, and nothing else matters to her in that moment.
The themes of superficiality, revenge, obsession and gender inequality are communicated through the wedding sequences aesthetic. The aesthetic has a sharp contrast which reflects the differences between men and women in the story, and the way that the characters performances and costumes change throughout the scene reflects the theme of superficiality. Mise-en-scen, cinematography, and performance and sound create the scenes aesthetic, and therefore communicate the themes intended in the wedding sequence.
Key tip: consider and name this sequence a shirt film, and split this short film up into sequences within itself, such as the rooftop sequence, etc.
Cinematography:
The scene begins with a frame within a frame, where a picture of Romina as a child is kept-centre frame to bring our attention to it. The camera pulls out to reveal that it is part of a slideshow and being showed at a party. The camera then crabs to the right to show off all the guests and the scale of the wedding party. We then cut to a shot from even further back to reveal the full-scale of the party. A handheld camera shot immerses us in the scene, as it is being filmed by a cameraman, making it feel more real. The frame is repositioned to have the archway centre-frame to signify the importance of the people coming through it. The camera pulls back to follow the couple, almost making it a tracking shot to show us how important they are. As they begin to dance the camera follows them to keep our attention on them. The camera also glides around to show them from different angles, and they are shown to be facing away from one another in parallel edited cuts. This also implies that the couple are married more so for the sake of appearances, rather than actual love.
Another wide shot of the whole room displays the expense and glamour of it all. The handheld camera shows that they know they are being recorded, hence, putting on a false face of happiness. The camera pushes forward to keep the couple centre frame bring our attention to their false happiness. The next shot of people sat at a table is framed like a photograph, showing that Romina feels observed and recorded. After she realises what has happened to her, she is left alone in the shot, showing her feelings of isolation and fear. The camera tracks her alone, signifying that she is the only character of importance at that moment, and comes to rest on a short of her looking in the mirror to symbolise self-reflection. This also allows the woman Romina calls have room in frame, showing her importance but also Romina’s concentration on her, and desire to keep herself hidden from her. We then see Romina’s reaction as we push in to focus on her face. The camera then arcs around into an over the shoulder shot to show what Romina is focusing her anger on, and the look on her face.
We then have our attention shifted from Romina to the girl by a focus pull, and the second phone call is shot with Romina in the background to show what the woman’s perspective is like, how she does not notice Romina but Romina has not stopped looking at her. It also shows her grieving process. As Romina walks away from the dance, a canted angle shot symbolises how her world has fallen apart. We then see a POV shot from her perspective to emphasise how observed and frightened she feels. We see her calming down when the camera is at eye-level and more steady, but when shots are more frantic is shows the breaking down of this perfect facade the couple has created. This communicates the themes of superficiality, power and obsession.
A birds-eye-view shot tracks her and leads to the audience thinking that she is about to commit suicide, raising the tension of the moment, and also emphasises the sheer size of the building, and thus, the danger of the fall. A shallow depth of field keeps Romina in focus and everything else out of focus, showing that she is the only thing of importance in this moment, and is very deep in thought/grief. This also reflects how things look when you are crying. The camera stops moving around and the editing slows down as the chef consoles Romina, showing how he is sensible, wise, and how his words are calming Romina. After Romina storms back into the hall, the camera is shaky, reflecting her anger and broken facade. We see a shot of the chef in the kitchen, centre frame to bring our attention to him, and how he is laughing at the encounter he had. We then see a reaction shot of how humiliated and distraught Romina is. The dancing is shown as more chaotic by the camera staying on Romina and the woman she hates, showing her obsession with her and her desire for revenge, and how everything else is out of focus for her. It also makes the audience feel dizzy and match the feeling of Romina and the woman she is spinning with.
Lots of canted angle shots emphasise the mayhem of the scene and the escalation of events. The camera moves unsteadily around the scene to match Romina’s drunken haze, and a series of two shots of Romina and her husband show their faces close together, that they no longer love each other, and are desperate. This communicates the themes of gender inequality and barriers, more specifically those set up by male power complex’s, being overcome/destroyed.
Sound:
The upbeat and popular song titanium plays in the diegetic, compiled score. This matches the couples apparent happiness, but also links to the theme of Romina standing up to her terrible husband later on. The song also enters the pre-chorus’s as the couple enter to build suspense and signify their importance. As the song builds up to a crescendo, the pace of the editing speeds up to match/reflect it. After a temporal cut, the more music is more classical and traditional, to symbolise the grand and expensive nature of the wedding. It is quietened after a temporal cut to let us hear the dialogue. As Romina looks on at her husbands mistress, we can hear their conversation, though we know that she cannot, showing that she is probably fearing what is being said. The diegetic sound of her breathing rises in the diegetic score to bring attention to her state of panic.
The next diegetic complied music played is very light and airy, but the volume increases as she touches hands to signify the importance of this moment. Her quavering voice is also contrasted by the romantic music playing, making the scene feel more ironic and grim. The diegetic sound of the door closing matches the end of the song, making way for complete silence on the roof. Our attention is brought to her conversation with the chef by the silence, the only sound other than the two characters the sounds of the cars below, immersing us in this environment on the roof, reflecting the isolation and safety there. Little music is played when Romina begins causing chaos in the ballroom, making the events seem much more serious and embarrassing, adding emphasis to to them. It also makes the diegetic sound of the bottle popping more shocking, and also makes it seem more like a gun shot has happened, similar to earlier when we were tricked into thinking that Romina has jumped off the roof.
Mise-en-scen:
The background of the image of Romina as a child symbolises anger and danger, a foreshadow to her later outburst. The couple sat at the table are completely surrounded by food, wine, expensive times that show how rich and elaborate this wedding is, and the expectations placed on the couple. The party lights are flashy and bright, showing excitement and reflecting feelings of joy and ecstasy. The party smoke and beautiful chandeliers show that a lot has been spent on making the wedding seem nice, which reflects the couples fake joy together. Their entrance is also made more theatrical by the red carpet, making them look like royalty, almost. Romina’s dress looks expensive, intricate, beautiful, and so does her husbands, showing their want to look happy and successful as a couple.
The colour palette is very light and blue, filled with cold colours that foreshadow bad events. In the new setting of the roof the palette becomes filled with more orange colours to signify a change in atmosphere. The ball room is filled with cameras to show how Romina feels observed and without privacy, and how much expectation is on the new couple. As Romina becomes more frustrated, hair makeup is drained away by her tears, and her dress and hair becomes ragged and dirty, where it was once so delicate and elegant. This symbolises her spiral and descent from a false face of happiness to her real emotions of grief and frustration. Communicates themes of superficiality, or rather the destruction of it.
There always seems to be a camera on screen, showing that this entire wedding is almost just for show. As her husband walks up the stairs, the colour palette is made green by the lighting there, symbolising envy and jealousy, the negative qualities of his character. As Romina delivers her monologue, lighting strikes to symbolise her rage, an example of pathetic fallacy. The white dress and chef’s uniforms match, showing a similarity between the bride and him, and also implying honesty, which makes the chef’s later telling of the story all the more crushing for Romina.
When the groom’s mistress is thrown into a mirror, the entire room is specked with glass to emphasise the severity of the moment, as-well as how much blood the woman is covered in when we next see her. The entire ballroom is in a state of disrepair by now, with tables toppled over and food littering the floor, emphasising how everything has fallen apart, and the facade has been shattered, also symbolised by the mirror breaking. As Romina rips out her hair extension it symbolises that she is completely done with her facade of happiness, and is at the final stage of her descent into disarray. An example of expressive costume that communicated the theme of superficiality.
Editing:
The camera cuts from a shot of the slideshow to a happy couple at a table to show how fond people are of the newly married pair. There are various cuts to people laughing and having fun to create a happy and up-beat atmosphere. This cutting also shows off the glamour of the wedding, and fits the pacing of the song. There is also one long shot of the couple entering to signify their I’m portable in this scene, over everyone else there. The scene is parallel edoted as the camera cuts between both of the newly weds in their separate friend groups to show that they are not as close as it would seem. A shot of the couple kissing has a camera interface edited over it to make it look like its from the perspective of a camera, putting the audience in the position of bystander to these awful events, forced to watch but not interfere, much like the on-lookers at the party. Shot-reverse shots do not show who is talking exactly all of the time to also show other peoples reaction to what is being said. This is seen on the roof when Romina and the chef talk to show that she is taking in all that he is saying.
As the scene progresses, the camera focuses more on Romina than her husband, which puts us in her position and makes us sympathise for her more. The separate movements of Romina and her husband are parallel edited to keep them separate, showing their secret desire to stay away from each other, which manifests as their physical distance now that the wedding is ruined. There is a glance-object of the shoe on the floor to show it’s importance as a symbol of false public appearance being dropped. After the woman is thrown into the mirror, a temporal cut slows the pace of the scene and gives the moment more gravity, and the atmosphere a more tense and thick feeling. It also serves as a cut to a new time period. The scene does not cut at all towards the send, making the audience look on at what is happening, immersing them in the moment.
Performance:
Everyone in the scene seems happy, almost to an ecstatic extent. As the couple walk through, they do not talk to each other at all, which implies that they are only doing this for public appearance, not actual love. They don’t even look at each other, and immediately separate when they have the chance. Everyone around them is so happy that it almost looks fake and put on like the couple themselves. The couples friends are also acting in stereotypical ways, with the men begging up their mate and the women ecstatically screaming in excitement. They are almost acting the way that they are supposed to as friends at a wedding. Romina’s husband, Ariel looks straight at the camera, implying his obsession with how he looks and acts when being watched.
The smiles for the camera look fake, acted. This is seen in how Romina smiles at people talking to her. Romina also try’s to walk away but is forcefully dragged back, which shows that she is not really choosing to be there. Her frequent mentions of Facebook also represent her artificiality and attention to appearance. We only see her joyful expression change as she sees someone she doesn’t recognise, which signifies that what she has noticed is of importance. We see Ariel lean over and touch the woman, which makes it clear that something has occurred between them. We also see this in how she turns around to grin after he has left. She also acts suspiciously as she quickly begins talking to someone else after accidentally making eye contact with Romina. For the first time, Romina does not look happy at all, emphasising just how concerned she is, and how important this moment is.
Even after being exposed by Romina, Ariel plastically smiles in front of everyone to keep his image happy and perfect. His eyes also frantically dart around to show that he is trying to see how other people are viewing him. Even though he has been caught cheating on his wife, he is still more concerned with maintaining his perfect image. Romina’s voice trembles after her fear is confirmed, and she stumbles and staggers around to show that she is disoriented and confused, shocked. She is visibly broken out of this hazy stupor when someone tries talking to her, showing how distracted she was.
After cheating on Ariel, Romina has a sudden newfound confidence which come out as she has her monologue, but there are also notes of sadness and grief in her voice, showing that she is doing this in self-defence. Ariel looks scared and mortified by his wife standing up to him, and at the threat of his perfect image being ruined, he cannot handle it, so breaks down and cries, completely ruining his image. Romina clearly enjoys this chaos she has caused, where Ariel does not, showing that she believes she has nothing left to lose. Her joy is clearly bittersweet though, as she revels in the madness, but obviously misses the pace she had before, and the happiness, whether real or not. Ariel is clearly beneath Romina as he is cared and consoled by his friends and family, whilst she does not care and walks around alone, done with her fake identity. She seems to take a certain peace after the mirror incident, accepting the chaos of her life, and the tatters of her image and marriage. She mocks her husband and the wedding itself, which she now admits was a facade, as she goes through the usual wedding traditions like cutting the cake and throwing the bouquet. Ariel is clearly resentful of her for ruining his life, and no longer cares to look happy and perfect for the cameras. As the couple makes up, they seem to take excitement and eagerness to repair their lives, or simply live them, now that they can take peace in the fact that they can’t fix it.
This low-angle shot of Ariel shows Romina’s new found power over him.
“Copy the text below into a new post. Research and answer the questions. Augment your post with whatever you see fit — pictures, videos, stills, or anything else that might be helpful.”
“1.Define a portmanteau film. What are other notable examples from recent years?”
A portmanteau film is a film that combines two or more stories in the manner of a portmanteau(a blend of words). Some notable recent portmanteau films are The French Dispatch(Wes Anderson, 2021) and Ghost Stories(Andy Nyman, Jeremy Dyson, 2017).
“2.Give a brief synopsis of each of the stories in the film. Which are the most effective? Why do you think these stories have been chosen?”
The first story involves multiple people on a flight realisation through conversation that they are all related to one person, who is responsible for them being on the plane, revealing that the story is his revenge story, as he crashes the plane, killing himself and everyone on board. The second story is of a woman who realises that her most recent restaurant customer is a loan shark responsible for her fathers suicide, and she is tempted by the chef to take her revenge on him. The plot to murder him is complicated as the waitress becomes conflicted as to what she should do, and eventually the chef takes matters into her own hands by murdering the man herself. The third story is of a man who insults a reckless driver on an isolated road, and is forced to confront him after breaking down. The story evolves in a brief saga of revenge and obsession between the two men, who end up killing each other when their cars blow up. The fourth story is of a demolitions expert who’s life crumbles when he is fired, publicity humiliated, loses custody of his daughter, and frequently/unfairly fined. He eventually takes matters into his own hands by detonating a bomb in a tow company car. Park, and ends up being revered as a hero in prison, who stood up to a corrupt system, and is appropriately nicknamed “dynamite”. In the fifth, a wealthy man hires his groundskeeper to take the fall for a hit-and-run committed by his son, but events begin to spiral out of his control as his lawyer, prosecutor and groundskeeper all demand higher compensation. The story ends with a deal being arranged, but is made pointless when the groundskeeper is, presumably, murdered by the drive-by’s grieving husband as he is escorted out of the house. In the sixth and final story a bride discovers, at her wedding, that she has been cheated on by her new husband. This sends her into a drunken spiral fuelled by obsession and revenge, which ends by ruining the entire wedding and mentally breaking herself and her husband. The car and dynamite stories are the most effective, since they do not last too long or little time, and also use their time effectively to build subtle character arch’s and get across their themes, and also build suspense to satisfying yet unexpected endings. The stories have been chosen since they involve themes of violence and revenge, building suspense through their character development and the actions that they take, often through unpredictable routes.
“3.The literal translation of the title is Savage Tales. How is this a more appropriate title and how well does it apply to each of the stories in the film?”
This is more appropriate since the actions that the characters often take are outright or more implicitly savage, for the effects that they have on the people around them. It applies well to each story in the film since all stories follow characters who lose their innocence and even sanity in the face of unfortunate events, often leading to acts of incredible violence and savagery.
“4.Explain the title sequence — how is it an appropriate choice for the tone, message and aesthetics of the film?”
The title sequence shows clips of wild animals. This is appropriate since may of the story’s portray certain characters as prey and others as predators, which adds an interesting theme to the classic revenge formula, by making the method of revenge and questions about morality lend depth and seriousness to the simple plot of revenge.
“5.What does the viewer learn about Argentine society from watching the film? Does this accurately reflect the political and social reality?”
Some of the stories deal with social issues of sexism, the poverty and wealth divide, and government incompetence. These social issues are mostly focused on in the dynamite story, in which the protagonist takes on a powerful tow truck company, and the wedding episode, where a grieving bride takes revenge on her husband who takes advantage of her, and the hit-and-run story where a wealthy man tries to entice a poor man into taking the fall for a horrific crime with the promise of money. This is accurate, as reflected by the most wealthy 3% of Argentinian society, and the issue of corrupt politics is reflected in the restaurant story, in which a loan shark runs for mayor.
“6.Are there aesthetic differences between each of the stories? How do the aesthetics support the story being told?”
The aesthetics are gritty and violent, reinforcing the themes of brutality in the film through blood, dirt and uncleanliness. This portrays the loss of innocence, as seen with the blood soaked wedding dress, or dirty and blood stained suit. It symbolises the loss of civility and rationality through corrupted versions of neat clothing and appearances.
“7.Are there any notable similarities or differences in the representations of men and women, rich and poor?”
Yes! Women are depicted as powerful but often underestimated by men, who are portrayed as obsessive and power-driven. Some of the stories in this film explore themes such as women standing up to men who attempt to undermine them, and how men can get into conflict when their pride is damaged or challenged.
Wild tales was directed by Damien Szifron in 2014, and tells multiple unique stories of violence, love and revenge. The film holds an important place in the portmanteau/anthology genre because it is a relatively recent and low budget($3.3-4.5 million) film that made substantial success in the box office($30.6-44.1 million) and includes many differing and un-flinching stories that do not stray from the genre to make it more accessible to audiences.
The film switches at unexpected intervals to new stories that follow different characters in usually intense dilemmas that involve themes of morality and violence, revenge and conflict with other people or inner-conflict. The narrative is structured in a unique way, following an anthology of stories that are connected in no ways. The characters it follows have somewhat small amounts of time to play out their arch’s, but the film uses it as time effectively to create audience investment in the characters and their story plots, and also raise suspense and get across the themes and messages intended by each story.
The film is important as it is one of the most famous Argentinian films outside of the country, proving that the film is respected on a global scale, and also that the anthology genre can be executed in a successful way that can be entertaining and engaging for international audiences.
I personally loved Wild Tales! I felt that the method of storytelling was pulled of perfectly and the transitions were done seamlessly. The characters and plots were memorable and the film had some deeper meanings that were portrayed in otherwise entertaining and exiting sequences. I personally found the broken down car sequence the most exiting due to its unrelenting intensity and horror aspects, but the dynamite story was my favourite for its genius character development and fascinating portrayal of morality and revenge on society. My only critique is that the last two stories in the film were rather confusing and less entertains, also containing less meaningful and understandable themes, and uncomfortable scenes that made it hard to get invested in the plot or characters. Other than that, the film proves that a seemingly complicated genre/form of film can be made to work in a way that makes it more entertaining than many other films. I respect it for its success in gaining audience engagement in its short stories, and the memorable moments in the film.
“How far do each of the films you have studied represent key characters in ways that reinforce or challenge the audiences expectations?”
Vidal (left) is made to represent that evil fascist regime of the Civil War. Ofelia (right) represents that good in the film, and thus a direct contrast to Vidal and his faction.
Essay Plan:
– Vidal represents the fascist regime in the war so I will focus on an analysis of his faction instead of him specifically.
– I will do the same for Ofelia as she represents the moral and good forces in the film, so I will avoid specific analysis of her and more so the faction she stands for.
– The soldiers are shown to be evil primarily through performance and mise-en-scen, but Vidal is made to be a dominant and intimidating presence via cinematography also.
The good faction directly contrasts the evil via mise-en-scen and performance, but specific characters like Ofelia and Mercedes are shown as good people via cinematography, like Vidal, also.
Version 1:
Cinematography, sound, editing, mise-en-scen and performance are all very important in creating representations that reinforce the audiences expectations. Characters that represent the good and evil factions are represented as such via the fundamental aspects of film form that make the audience see them in a certain way.
In the fig tree sequence, Vidal and his men are established as cunning and ruthless members of a fascist regime through mise-en-scen, sound and cinematography. As he and his men take off on horse-back, the non-diegetic composed score quickly picks up into a dramatic and intense mixture of trumpets and drums, signifying a grand entrance. This symbolises the patriotism and pride he and his troops have, and also makes them seem like a more intimidating and imposing presence, reinforcing the audience expectation of them as evil fascists, likely due to the context of the Spanish Civil War. He and his men are also represented as evil via mise-en-scene, as their uniforms are extremely neat and tidy, organised and decorated. They show great patriotism amongst the army, and also serve as a direct contrast to the clothes worn by the good characters in the film. They symbolise the wealth and strict protocol of the army, while the more ragged and dark-coloured clothes of the protagonist show that they are poor, and more honest and kind. Performance is also used to build an imposing and obsessed representation of the antagonist forces in the film. This is seen in how Vidal seems completely concentrated on the abandoned campsite once he reaches it, and stares intently off into the woods in search for the rebels.
In this same sequence, the forces of good are shown as a direct contrast to the forces of evil, represented through mise-en-scen and sound to portray them as moral and just characters. When the scene cuts from the Captain and his men to Ofelia leaving the mill, the non-diegetic composed score picks up into a fast-paced mix of horn instruments that give the scene a light and happy feel, reflecting Ofelia’s feelings of excitement and adventure. This gives her character a more welcoming demeanour, as opposed to the intense music that plays as Vidal and the troops leaves the camp. Ofelia’s outfit is also much more quaint and simple than Vidal’s, made up of much lighter and warmer colours that fit into the scenery of the woods more. This represents the difference between her and Vidal, as she is represented as a person less obsessed with her appearance and removing rebels, but instead going on a fantastic quest. She does not move with aggression or intensity, like Vidal, but a calm and peaceful pace, with a content yet curious look on her face, a direct contrast to the intensity with which Vidal and his men search for rebels. This is how the key characters are represented in ways that reinforce the audiences expectations, but it also challenges them by representing the rebels in a way that puts them into a positive light. From contextual knowledge, the rebels that the fascist nationalists were hunting were communist, and used guerrilla style combat methods to fight the nationalists. When they are showed at the end of Vidal’s side of the scene, they are dressed in dark and brown clothes that let them blend more into the environment, and these more simple and humble uniforms make them seem more kind and less boastful than the soldiers. The non-diegetic composed score picks up in the mix at their reveal, and has a light yet dramatic tone, that is less dark and foreboding than that what plays when the soldiers ride away, and so portrays the rebels as forces of good who directly oppose the forces of evil. Therefore, the film uses mise-en-scen and sound and performance to create representations of key characters that challenge and reinforce the audiences expectations.
In the first shaving sequence, mise-en-scen, performance and cinematography are all used to represent Vidal, who represents the forces of evil, in a way that reinforces the audiences expectations of a fascist Captain. As he shaves, the various items scattered around his room symbolise his wealth, such as the gramophone, razor, and cigarette, which also provides smoke that gives him an intimidating appearance. These all show his control over resources and rations, and is also shown by the fully stocked log shelves and large fireplace, mug, and table in the dining room. The Captain also seems completely focused as he shaves, looking intently in the mirror and taking great care as he prepares for and then shaves himself. This, combined with the diegetic music playing from the gramophone, which has a classical and traditional tone, implies that Vidal sees himself as a sort of patriotic hero, and views this shaving as a ritual of masculinity, basking in his authority. This reinforces the audiences expectations of how fascist soldiers of high ranking likely viewed themselves during the civil war.
We also see the difference in uniform and representation of Vidal through cinematography as ways that the audience’s expectations are reinforced. When Vidal is in the dining room, he polishes a very clean and expensive looking boot, symbolising his wealth and attention to detail when crafting his appearance. Hid uniform is blue, which matches the colour palette at night, symbolising his control over the environment. Even as he polishes this boot, he seems extremely intent, as if it was the most important thing to him in that moment, showing his obsession with how he presents himself as a Captain. When Mercedes enters, her uniform is almost not a uniform, as it is of simple brown and green colours, similarly to the rebels and Ofelia, showing where her true allegiance stands, but also representing her as a more humble and hipness character than Vidal. It also shows the difference between the traditional roles of women and men in the film, which from context, we know were very prejudiced and often put women in lower roles whereas men had higher roles of authority and power which is shown through cinematography in this scene. When Vidal stands, there is an over the shoulder shot from behind Mercedes of him putting his hand on her shoulder. This keeps Mercedes at eye level but is a low angle shot facing up at Vidal, showing how much taller and intimidating he is than her. This also represents his authority, obsession with maintaining control through fear, and authority over Mercedes as a Captain. However, this traditional expectation of the characters is challenged when Mercedes stands up to Vidal, when she says that the rabbits are too young to be cooked. This does not sound like much, but no one else in the film, even the doctor, has shown defiance to the Captain, instead saying what he wants them to say and following his lead. However, the Captain is shown more in this scene, and so he is represented as more powerful and intimidating than Mercedes, who represents the good in this scene.
To a large extent, Pan’s Labyrinth uses cinematography, sound, and mise-en scen and performance to represent key characters in ways that reinforce and occasionally challenge the audiences expectations. The audience is made to view characters in certain ways that may differ from or, mostly, confirm their pre-conceptions of them through the tone of the non-diegetic composed score, cinematography that frames them in ways to convey their character traits, performances that convey emotion and psychology, and mise-en-scen that contrasts key characters and the forces they represent.
“Discuss how aesthetics are used to communicate themes in your two chosen films. Make detailed reference to particular themes in your answer.”
Essay plan:
– Guillermo Del Toro uses many different unique methods of filmmaking to create a dark and fantastical aesthetic in pan’s labyrinth. – For this essay on aesthetics in pan’s labyrinth I will discuss the key elements of film form in certain key sequences from the film, and how these are combined to create an aesthetic. – Specifically the first shaving sequence and first bedtime sequence, and for these I will go into detail about how cinematography, sound, editing, mise-en-scen and performance are used to combine and create an aesthetic, and from there how this communicates themes. after these two sequences are done I will expand onto an overview on the whole film. – Here I will simplify how Del Toro uses film form to create aesthetic, using what I discussed in detail in the sequences as evidence for how the entire film is given an aesthetic, and from here how this is used to communicate themes. (The essay question is on pan’s labyrinth and wild tales but I am only discussing pan’s labyrinth)
Essay: Version 1.
In Pan’s Labyrinth, the film has a dark and mystical aesthetic that creates and emphasises themes of the supernatural, mystically, fantasy and violence. They are predominantly created via the films unique mise-en-scen and cinematography, but all fundamentals of film form are used by the director, Guillermo Del Toro, to communicate these themes.
For the first bedtime sequence, Del Toro mostly uses cinematography and editing to give the scene a fantasy aesthetic that evolves into a dark and intense tone. The scene begins in Ofelia’s mothers’ room. This is shown by a tracking shot of Ofelia that pan’s to the right to reveal the room. The room is made to look dark and gloomy via the silvery and blue-tinted colour pallet used in the film at night. This creates a dark and still environment, and also symbolises the Captain’s control on the setting, as his uniform is blue as-well. The scene is given a slow and calm pace to immerse the audience in the dialogue by keeping the camera on Ofelia and her mother and not cutting. The camera leaves this shot via a hidden cut when it pedestals down into the darkness in the sheets. When it reemerges it is showing the inside of Ofelia’s mothers womb. This makes the movement through the scene feel fluid and constant, creating a dream-like feeling and fantastical aesthetic. This communicates the themes of imagination, and the conflict between fiction and reality in the film.
The camera continues this smooth and gliding movement pattern as Ofelia tells a fairy-tale, as seen when it pans to the right, exiting Ofelia’s mothers’ womb and entering the mountain-top setting. This makes the audience feel like they are in a dream, symbolising Ofelia’s undying imagination and the fairy-tales that she believes in, helping us to understand how she imagines these stories. The hidden transition is also made more smooth by the red colour of the womb matching that of the sky in the mountain shot, making the audience not even realise a cut had been made, reinforcing the dream-like quality of the sequence, and also giving the environment a dark and sinister aesthetic with the deep colour of blood. The colour palette once again changes to a dark and silvery-blue as the camera pedestals down from the mountain top, making the transition back into the real world all the less noticeable, creating a dark and gloomy aesthetic that makes it hard to differentiate the story from the reality in the film, communicating the theme of Ofelia not knowing the difference between reality and fiction.
Mise-en-scen is also used to create aesthetic in the bedtime sequence. For example, Vidal’s uniform is pristine and organised , decorated and clean. This gives him a sinister and cruel aesthetic, showing the themes of his obsession with appearance, expanded on more in the first shaving sequence, and his dedication to patriotism for the fascist regime he serves under. The performance by him and his soldiers emphasises this, since his posture is upright and assertive, dominant, whilst his men closely follow him, staying behind him and completing his commands immediately. This shows his authority and ranking above everyone else. The theme of Vidal’s violence is also enforced further when his men look on in visible disgust at the murder of the farmers, emphasising the effect he has on people, and his lack of empathy. This gives Vidal a grim and cruel aesthetic as a character. When the doctor is talking to Vidal, Vidal is shown through low-angle shots which show the height contrast between him and the doctor, making the Captain seem like a much more imposing and intimidating figure. The gears and mechanisms shown in the backdrop of the basement give the scene an almost steampunk aesthetic, which emulates the cold heartless and robotic nature of Vidal, communicating the theme of cruelty and un-caring tyranny of Vidal.
When Vidal confronts the farmers, the camera stays on an over-the shoulder shot of them looking at him. This shows off their concerned expressions and postures, Vidal’s height compared to theirs, and also builds suspense as we see him searching their bags. This adds to Vidal’s powerful but evil and imposing aesthetic, showing the theme of his violence and indifference to innocence. The camera cuts between a close high-angle shot and a close low-angle shot as Vidal beats the farmer’s son to death. This rapid editing makes the scene more intense, amplifying the shock of Vidal’s violence. The camera angles place us in the position of Vidal to bring the audiences attention to the brutality, and the farmer’s son to show Vidal’s calm and collected expression as he commits this act. This distressing and memorable scene adds to Vidal’s aesthetic, making him a cruel and sadistic character as-well as a collected and cunning commander. This communicates the theme of Vidal’s two-sided character, who is both calm and authoritative, yet has the capacity to be extremely violent and is prone to outbursts of rage.
The first shaving sequence uses mise-en-scen and performance to create the aesthetic of Vidal’s character and portray the themes involving him and the relationship he has with other characters, such as the wealth divide. As Vidal looks into his mirror, we see how intent and concentrated he is, as-well as the way that he confidently strolls around his room and carefully prepares his shaving equipment. The lack of hair on his face, combined with the immense care with which he is going about such a simple task as of shaving, give the character a sinister and powerful aesthetic, which reflects the themes of Vidal’s pride and self-obsession
As Vidal sits in the dining room, mise-en-scen is used to represent his control over the wealth and rations of this part of Spain, and his attentiveness to his presentation. He sits, polishing his boots with full attention, reflecting his obsession with his appearance, and his tidy and decorated uniform represent his patriotism as a Captain, and also his careful attention to his presentation. When Vidal stands and places his hand on Mercedes’s shoulder, an over-the-shoulder shot shows how much taller he is than her, making him a more intimidating and imposing presence to the audience, giving him a threatening aesthetic and communicating the theme of his power over the environment and those in it. The kitchen is also designed to reflect his power, as seen in the completely stocked space for the fireplace, which is very large, and the very long dining table. These represent the Captain’s wealth and power over rationing, and also effects the pale-man’s dining room. His large coffee mug also contributes to the Captain’s powerful but corrupt aesthetic as a character which delivers the theme of the wealth divide between the peasantry and nobility/government in Spain during the Civil War. The theme of Vidal’s dominance and authority is also shown through low-angle shots that face up at him. This makes him seem like a much more giant and physically imposing figure than those like Ofelia or Mercedes, who are kept art eye-level.
In Pan’s Labyrinth, Guillermo Del Toro uses aesthetics to communicate certain themes, mostly via mise-en-scen and cinematography.. The first bedtime sequence is best for analysing how he can give a certain scene and environment an aesthetic, and the first shaving sequence shows how he can give characters aesthetic and can deliver themes through them and their surroundings. These aesthetics deliver certain themes such as wealth divides, the supernatural and the line between reality and fiction. This is done through cinematography that makes the audience see a character in a certain way, editing that creates a sense of fluid movement through a scene, and mise-en-scen that reflects themes and symbolises messages to the audience.
The scene begin’s with an arching wide-shot to show where the scene is taking place, what characters are involved, and establish the environment. It also show’s that Ofelia is alone in this moment. We then cut to a close-up of what’s in her book, signifying its importance, and the camera follows the images hat match up with the narration, creating a visual link between the story of fiction and the reality playing outer in front us. When Ofelia beings drawing on the wall, a close-up shows the shape that she is outlining, eluding to its significance later on in the scene, and also the effect that the chalk then has on the wall.
The camera cuts to the other side of the door to give the audience an un-obstructed view of the new environment. It also shows the scale of the hallway compared to Ofelia in a wide-shot. It also makes room for the contrast between the real and fantasy world, emphasising the nightmarish nature of the fantasy world. The wide-shot also shows how long the hallway is, which will be important as Ofelia fells from the pale-man, and also the alien architecture of the room.A close-up shows the hourglass and its importance, signifying that time may run out.
There is a wide-shot from over Ofelia’s shoulder to reveal the wide scale of the pale-mans room. The camera also stays near Ofelia to immerse us in her position, and make the audience feel like they are part of the scene. The camera crabs from left to right to follow Ofelia, keeping her centre frame and therefore the centre of the scene’s attention, but the camera is also placed on the other side of the table, allowing for us to seen all of the food placed on the table and her reaction to it.
This shot stops abruptly and rises to a slightly high-angle shot facing down at Ofelia. The stop makes the reveal of the pale man more surprising and shocking, and the camera pedestal makes him seem more imposing and also display the scale of the creature compared to Ofelia. It also rests for a moment on the pale-man to bring its horrific features to the audiences attention, allowing for them to become fearful of the monster, as they understand what it looks like.
This wide-shot brings the audience’s attention to the grotesque form of the pale man.
After picking up the Petri dish, a close-up signifies that it is important, and an over-the-shoulder shot brings the lack of eye sockets on the pale man to our attention, making us question why there are eyes on the plate and where they fit into his character. A close-up of Ofelia shows that she is looking up, and so when we see the arching shot of the tapestries we, the audience, understand where they are in the room, and the camera movement shows all of the tapestries, showing the pale-mans history without audibly explaining it.
The low angle-shot of the shoes rises to make it seem like a very tall and intimidating pile, and the camera switches focus to show Ofelia’s reaction to the shoe’s. Letting the audience know that she is realising the danger of the situation. A wide-shot shows all the key-holes, and therefore establishes the risk of this moment. A close-up of the key signifies its importance, and a close-up of it being put into the lock raises suspense as we wonder whether it will work or not.
The camera is inside the hole as Ofelia reaches for the dagger, which makes us fear for what is inside the hole and how much danger she is in by putting her arm in there, and the silhouette in the bottom right corner makes us wonder what that is, increasing the tension of the moment. A close-up of the blade shows its importance.
The pale man is kept out of focus in this shot to show that Ofelia is oblivious to him. It also keeps him in frame though to show how close he is to her, and also how she has not noticed him, and is instead focused on the food.
As Ofelia leaves, another shot lingers on the pale-man, since now we are wondering whether he will move or not. As she walks away, a close-up shows that she has come to a realisation, and the camera pans to the right to show what her attention has been caught by. A close-up of the grape brings to attention how enticing it is, and how delicious it looks. As Ofelia eats it the camera pedestals and pushes forwards, swapping focus to the pale-man to bring our attention to him and emphasise that he is about to do something, building suspense. The close-up of his hands shows the disgusting look of his fingers, and also pedestals up to show him coming to life and breathing for the first time. The next close-up shows his hands and him putting the eyes into them, answering the question posed by why the eyes were on a plate if he had no eye sockets.
The camera stays on Ofelia and keeps the pale-man out of focus to show that she is oblivious to him, and also raise tension as he approaches her. When Ofelia finally see’s him, the camera switches focus and remains eye-level with Ofelia to show how much taller and imposing he is compared to her, and install fear of the pale man in the audience. The closeup of the pale-man shows the gore when he devours the fairies, showing what he is capable of. As Ofelia turns and runs, the pale-man is kept in frame to show him wiping his mouth, and that he is ready to chase Ofelia.
The camera rapidly pans to the left to show that Ofelia is running back home, keeping her centre frame and therefore the centre of attention, and the fast movement of the camera creates tension and a frantic moment. The camera cuts back to the pale man to show that he is now in pursuit of Ofelia. The shaky camera used as she is running creates tension and reflects her panic. The shot of the other side of the wall slowly pushes out/dolly’s backwards, implying that there is no hope left. The pale-man is also shown entering the hallway and holding up his arm to let the audience know that he can see her, and is going to approach her.
As the pale-man walks down the hallway the camera follows his feet by quickly crabbing to the left, showing that he is heading towards Ofelia and also showing the speed with which he is moving, raising the tension of the scene. A close-up shows the chalk dropping, showing where it landed and how Ofelia can’t retrieve it, the chair legs wobbling, showing how close it is to toppling Oliver and therefore raising the risk and tension of the moment, and Ofelia’s horrified reaction to the pale man. The camera also quickly cuts back and forth between her and the pale man to emphasise how quickly he is catching up to her. When Ofelia climbs out of the doorway, there is a close-up of her hands on the floor to show how desperate and close to safety, and the camera quickly cuts between her feet and the pale mans closeness to them, raising tension and fear, keeping the audience on the edge of their seats. The doorway lets in light from the other room, emphasising the contrast between the two worlds and making the atmosphere and themes portrayed by the colour pallets more prevalent. There is also a close-up of the door to bring our attention to it shutting permanently.
There is clear similarity between the pale man and Vidal, such as their dining rooms, and the glassware on their tables.
Sound:
As the images come onto the page some fidgeting scribbling and scratching sounds can be heard, establishing a connection between the drawing and the magic of the moment, due to an invisible artist. The twinkle sound heard also adds to the fairy and fantasy themes/environment of the film. The non-diegetic narration shows Ofelia’s closeness to the story, and also shows the context for the images in the book. The non-diegetic composed score is subtle, with piano notes that adds a peaceful yet mysterious and somber atmosphere to the scene.
The chalk produces a sharp scraping sound on the wall, showing how rough and in-welcoming the architecture of the mill is, helping us understand Ofelia’s desire to escape. It also signifies the importance of the chalk in that moment, as important objects are the loudest in the diegetic sound score at their moment of significance. The later fizzing contrasts this, emphasising that the foaming and fizzing chalk is unnatural and adding to the fantasy element of the scene.
The music builds into a grand finish as Ofelia finally opens the door, signifying a change in environment and an important moment in the scene, keeping the audiences attention on the new world and building suspense as the door is slowly opened. The music here also signifies a grand entrance by Ofelia, showing her royal status in the fantasy world. The door also sounds extremely heavy as is it opened, showing Ofelia’s determination and obsession in the fantasy world. It also sounds like a boulder being pushed aside, adding a secretive and ancient feel to the new world.
As the camera shows the hallway, the music again builds into a trumpet filled climax, making the new environment feel un-welcoming and sinister. The distant diegetic sound of the pale man’s nasally and weak breathing makes the audience feel uncomfortable and concerned as Ofelia goes deeper into this fantasy world. This also establishes the pale-man’s power and dominion over the place, and eludes to a dark undertone to the new place.
The non-diegetic score regularly hits high notes that make the fantasy world feel more imposing and powerful. The diegetic sound of the chair wobbling also eludes to the later importance of it. A deep, fast sound of wind plays to make the environment feel cold and hostile, almost serving as a warning to Ofelia. Ofelia’s footsteps are quiet and isolated in the thick silence of the moment as she walks down the hallway, raising suspense as the audience anticipates a sudden rise in the sound mix or something to be revealed on screen. Otherwise the silence and unnerving ambient sounds like fire crackling and wind moving through the hall puts the audience on edge.
As Ofelia moves down the table and gets closer to the pale man the pitch and tempo of the breathing sounds increase, implying that they are coming from the pale man, making him more of an uncomfortable and intimidating presence, invoking fear of him in the audience. The composed score also reaches a sudden high as the pale man is revealed, making it more of a shock to the audience, creating fear of him in them, and also showing how invested Ofelia was in the food to the extent that she did not notice the pale man sat there.
This high-angle shot shows Ofelia’s terrifies expression at the pale man’s display of violence, and also how much taller he is than her.
As Ofelia picks up the Petri dish with the eyes on, a wet squelching sound can’t be heard. This establishes the texture of the eyes, creating disgust in them and adding to the detail of the grotesque nature of the pale man. While Ofelia looks at the tapestries on the ceiling, the distant and faint sound of babies crying creates an audible link to the images on screen, signifying the violence and brutality of the pale man. As Ofelia brings out the key, a sharp ringing sound emerges in the diegetic sound mix, showing that it is an item of significance at this moment, and is about to play an important part in the scene.
The skittish and chirping diegetic sounds of the fairy’s movement signals to Ofelia and therefore the audience what they are trying to communicate, and their light and quick chirps convey emotions of happiness and a sense of victory, which quickly changes once the pale man wakes up, making the violence of the moment when he devours them all the more visceral and shocking to the audience.
The blade that Ofelia retrieves produces a sharp yet faint ringing sound, emphasising its importance to the plot, making it also more memorable once it becomes an important item in the film, much later on. As soon as Ofelia turns back to the pale man the non-diegetic composed score evolves into a deep and sinister toned moment, which creates feelings of tension and discomfort in the audience, as they, and Ofelia, are now expecting him to move, raising the tension of the scene.The non-diegetic sound of a harp also signifies and conveys Ofelia’s captivating by the fruit, showing why she has stopped and what has caught her attention, adding a heavenly and holy importance to the food on the table. The score also gradually picks up as Ofelia gets closer to eating the fruit, and this conveys to the audience that a direct and immediate consequence of this is about to occur, which we understand to be the pale man since the camera comes to focus on him.
The tapestries bring attention to the grim history of the pale man, and how he specifically poses a threat to Ofelia.
As the pale man finally wakes up the non-diegetic score abruptly cuts off, making the moment more surprising and forcing the audience to keep complete attention on the pale man. The diegetic sounds of his movements are sudden, like bones cracking as they move for the first time in ages. His breathing too comes in long and deep and rough gasps, showing that this creature is ancient, and also making it seem more appealing and repulsive to the audience. This is also done by the sounds of his movements as he begins to walk, which are crooked and wet, which also increase in the sound mix as he gets closer to the camera, making the audience physically want to get further away from him.
We understand that the quick and frantic chirps from the fairy’s are intended to prevent Ofelia from eating the fruit, adding to the tension of the scene as we understand that they know about the pale man and the threat he poses. As the pale man moves his fingers, the string instruments in the composed score suddenly pick up, adding to the crooked and unnatural movements of the pale man with sudden and violent musical notes.
The non-diegetic composed and diegetic scores are layered, exampled by the manic chirping of the fairy’s and the building of the pitch of the intense and sinister music. This layering of sound makes the scene more intense and engaging for the audience.
Ofelia’s breathing deepens and accelerates, emphasising the fear that the pale man creates in her, and therefore the audience is left on edge too. The sounds of her footsteps as she sprints down the hall are rapid and heavy, showing her desperation to escape. When the pale man enters screen again and lifts up his arm a loud and screeching sound plays and temporarily dominates the diegetic sound mix, making the pale man a much more imposing and terrifying presence. We hear the diegetic sounds of his footsteps as he approaches Ofelia, increasing the tension off the scene. The chalk makes a faint but noticeable diegetic snapping sound, bringing the audiences attention to this and therefore establishing it as important. The diegetic sounds of the pale mans screeching sounds similar to a child in pain, naturally creating feelings of discomfort in the audience, making the creature more revolting and terrifying, and also adding tension, reminding the audience constantly that he is getting closer to Ofelia. The scraping sound of chalk on concrete is once again inserted to emphasise the importance of it as Ofelia draws one the ceiling. As Ofelia crawls into the real world, the close-up of her hands on the floorboard is accompanied by the diegetic sound of squeaking, which emphasises her desperateness to escape, and her closeness to safety and yet, danger. The same thing happens as the pale man thrusts his arms at Ofelia, showing his desperation in killing her. As the door shuts we also hear the diegetic sound of burning to show that it is shutting permanently.
The biblical amount of exotic food makes it enticing and tempting to both Ofelia and the audience, helping us understand why she chose to eat it, despite the earlier earning not to.
Editing:
The scene is kept at a slow pace by leaving shots long and in-interrupted, letting the audience, and Ofelia, take in the environment around them, and giving the scene appropriate time to raise suspense. As the camera dolly’s back down the hallway after Ofelia opens the door, the shot fades to a further away position, showing a passage of time and creating room without an unnecessary cut for us to view the hallway and new colour pallet. It also works better than a regular cut since Ofelia is still in the same place as in the previous shot, so a cut would be jarring as we, the audience, typically expect a change in shot after a cut, so a fade gives us more time to process this change in camera position.
We understand the scene with Ofelia opening the door and beginning to explore the pale man’s world to be continuity edited, as each shot takes place after the last. The scene changes to parallel editing though as the camera cuts back to the hourglass to remind the audience that time is running out. This is because we, the audience, understand that these two moments are taking place at the same time, and this serves the purpose of keeping in the audiences mind that time is running out for Ofelia, even when the hourglass is not on screen, raising the suspense of the scene and keeping the audience invested in the film as they know that things could go wrong for Ofelia at ant moment.
Post-filming, a red and hellish colouring has been added to the scene to make the environment seem. More intimidating and sinister. Every time an important objest is shown, it is done so via glance-object shots, signifying their importance as the camera keeps them as the only thing on screen. After releasing the fairies, the camera cuts back to Ofelia after holding focus on them for a moment, and she has moved, signifying a passage of time to avoid pointless scenes of the character walking around when the layout of this new world has already been established to us.
The scene cuts between Ofelia and her hand inside the hole to show that she does not know where her arm is reaching, what may be in the hole, and also her pained and struggling expression. As Ofelia leaves the room, her mental process is shown by moving the camera between her face and the fruit on the table, and the scene does not cut here so that we can see her turn her head and the camera move with it via panning to the left to show what she is looking at, and therefore what she is thinking about it.
As the pale man approaches Ofelia, the camera only cuts twice to slow the pace of the scene down and capture the audiences attention with the horror of the moment, and also raising suspense by making the moment feel longer by lack of edits. The scene begins to cut more rapidly between Ofelia and the pale man to show their proximity to each other, create tension in the scene and reflect the chaos and panic of the moment, immersing the audience in the process. There is more parallel editing when the camera cuts between the pale man and Ofelia to show that he is chasing her, making the scene more intense. A reaction shot shows Ofelia’s desperate reaction to the doorway shutting, emphasising how much worse the situation is becoming. The camera cuts rapidly between Ofelia on one side of the door and the pale man on the other, significantly increasing the tension of the moment. The scene finally stops cutting and rests on a wide-shot of Ofelia above the trapdoor after a close-up brings our attention to the door shutting, and this slows the pace of the scene and allows for the tension to dissipate.
This in-cut close up forces the audience to witness the horror and gore of the pale man.
Mise-en-scen:
Ofelia’s outfit is similar to that of Anne Frank, which links to the time period of world war 2 and also emphasises the themes of suffering and hiding and imprisonment by Ofelia in the wake of ruthless of fascism. This also links to the pile of shoes shown later on, creating fascist symbolism in the pale man. The fairy tale drawings are similar to fairy tales of medieval Europe, contributing to Ofelia’s desire to escape the present to live in another world. The colour of the room she is in is blue and silvery, adding to the sharp contrast between it and the fantasy world. It also makes the room feel cold and still, and the old objects randomly scattered around the room establish how hidden and secluded it is, and why Ofelia chose to go here to complete the task set by the faun. The colour of the room also reflects the colour of the Captains uniform, symbolising his control over the real world.
The size of the doorway is quite small, making it seem more claustrophobic , and also references Alice in wonderland, in which the young protagonist takes a journey into a beautiful fantasy world through a portal, except here the horror is amplified by the supposedly idealistic world of Ofelia’s imagination being a nightmare in disguise.
The walls of the fantasy world seem to be coated in blood, which gives it a hellish and nightmare like quality. The hallway is filled with pillars that seem to resemble those one would expect to find in ancient cathedrals, which may be done to reference instances of child abuse or demonic religious imagery. The hourglass is a clear link to the theme of time in the movie, more specifically time running out. There also seems to be fingers clutching the hourglass, symbolising the pale man’s control over time in this world, or a tree’s branches, perhaps in reference to the tree in the film earlier.
The large fireplace behind the pale man creates hellish imagery, and references the Captains fireplace, inventing a link between the two characters and their control of wealth, and destruction of innocence, and tendency for violence. Ofelia’s costume her also makes her stand out, and signifies her innocence in a world built on top of death and suffering. The bountiful food on the table references fairy tales such as Hansel and Gretel, in which evil witches lure in innocent children via food. The food on the table also references Vidal, and also looks fake, as if imagined, filled with jellies and fruit. This is done to reference the colour red again, and therefore blood, and also to create an image of what a child of Ofelia’s age may imagine a feat to look like.
The pale man is sat at the head of the table with his arms layer out in front of him, showing his dominance over the room, and also referencing the Captains same place at his table, and his control over his world. The pale man’s body is revolting and deformed, humanoid yet alien, with sagging skin, red eyes, sharp fingers, and extremely pale skin, exposing the veins beneath. This creates feelings of repulsion in the audience, creating a disgusting and hideous creature that matches its actions of cruelty and violence, perhaps showing what Vidal looks like beneath his own skin. The pale mans sagging skin also shows that he has not eaten in a long time, and his previous fat has just come to hand off his body. The lack of eye sockets also removes all capacity for emotion. The blackened fingers also show corruption and greed. The eyes on the table also seem stuck to the petri dish due to a sort of disgusting slime attaching them both, adding to the disgust that the pale man’s physical from conveys.
The tapestries are shown to convey the pale man’s violent history without unneeded dialogue. The architecture also links to medieval catholic cathedral architecture, and they also show that the pale man may have a disturbing pride in his cruel history. The pile of shoes is an obvious link to the Holocaust and themes of child suffering and Fascism, also showing how deadly and ruthless the pale man is, and how many other people have tried, and failed, to defeat him.
The key that Ofelia holds is gold and crooked, showing its importance but also fantastical nature. The dagger, also, is gold and bright silver, with elegant engravings and a curved hilt that looks to the faun’s horns, which makes it seem like a beautiful and valuable weapon, fit for royalty. The grape that Ofelia notices as she leaves is large, plum-sized even! It also has water on it, making it seem enticing and delicious.
After devouring the fairies, the pale man has blood all over his mouth and dripping down his chest, making him seem even more ruthless and un-caring for the suffering he causes to others. His now visible legs are skinny, crooked and frail, showing his previous inactivity, and how his form is almost human, just not completely, almost as if it is trying to replicate a human. When Ofelia finally shuts the door, we see a bright light spilling out from underneath it, showing that the door is shutting.
The tracking shot shows all of the food on the table, and Ofelia’s interest in it, by keeping both in focus and frame.
Performance:
As the drawings come onto the page, Ofelia seems completely immersed and fascinated in the drawings, showing her persistent child-like interest in magic and fairy tales. As the chalk begins to dissolve into the wall she seems surprised, showing that even she cannot predict how the magic will effect her world, yet she does not seem scared or apprehensive, signifying that she is not scared of the fantasy world, just eager to explore it. She also takes a good amount of time to study the hallway, showing that she is eager but not reckless in her exploration of the fantasy world. She takes her time as she walks about, which we, the audiences, knows to be foolish, as time is running out. This shows that she is mindful of danger but can be distracted by her obsession with the stunning and alien world in front of her, and become oblivious to her time limit in it.
She does not take her eyes off the food on the table as she walks down it, displaying her interest in it, and foreshadowing her later folly in being tempted by it. This also gives a reason for her to be shocked by the sudden appearance of the pale man. As with everything else not from the real world, Ofelia is absorbed by her curiosity in this foreign creature, yet still seems disgusted by its physical appearance. Her breathing gets more rapid and heavy as she looks around and notices the numerous signs of the pale-man’s danger, showing that she has caught on to the danger she may be in herself.
When she pulls out the key, Ofelia seems temporarily completely engulfed by her fascination in the item as she stares at it with a surprised expression for a few seconds. As she tries to retrieve the dagger from the hole, Ofelia briefly stands on her tip-toes to remind the audience that she is still small and vulnerable, and amplifies the risk and therefore suspense of the moment as we know that she cannot see what is in the hole. Her struggling expression shows that she is in possible danger, and is also not an invisible protagonist.
The diegetic ringing sound brings our attention to the dagger and its importance, and its intricate design makes it seem like an important and precious item.
As Ofelia walks up to the pale man she seems nervous, letting the audience realise that she expects something to happen now, raising the suspense. When she tries to eat the grape she frustratedly swats the fairy’s away, and puts on an expression of pure joy and euphoria as she eats the grape, which show the audience the extent of her ignorance in this moment.
The movements of the pale man are sudden and crooked, his legs wobbling as he walks, showing how frail they are. His breathing is rough and laboured, showing his age, and his hands sake, showing his hunger and recent wake up from, presumably, a very long nap. Ofelia’s reaction to the pale man matches that of the audiences, disgusted and disturbed. Her breathing quickly becomes fast and heavy as she runs away, showing her panic, and her face and voice is terrified as she see’s the door closing, showing how desperate she is to escape. The pale man is clearly blind and reliant on his hands, as he recklessly stumbles about and holds his hands out before him to see where he is going.
After the chalk breaks, Ofelia looks back to see the pale man approaching her, and at his her face becomes pained and terrified, showing how much more serious and urgent the situation has become, making us, the audience, sympathise with Ofelia and also making the scene all the more intense and engaging. The pale man is also shown to be sadistic by the malicious grin on his bloody moth, showing his morbid pleasure in making others suffer.
As Ofelia finally escapes, we can see her face as she crawls desperately out of the hole, showing her eagerness to escape. As her legs are pulled out of the fantasy world we see a frustrated expression on the pale-man’s face and his arms frantically swinging to catch Ofelia, showing his desperate greed and hunger. When Ofelia shuts the door her breathing slowly slows to show that she has finally escaped danger, but suddenly picks up as the banging and screaming temporarily increases, establishing the fear that the pale man has created in her. But her panic evidently dissipates as the silence overcomes the screaming from the pale man.
At the beginning of the fig tree sequence, the camera pans to the right to follow the movement of the soldiers rushing into the woods. This shows that they are the dominant force in this moment and keeps the audiences attention on them. The movement of the soldiers and Ofelia’s are also from the left side of the screen to the right, implying a journey on both sides of the story. We then cut to Ofelia and the shot has her in frame to show that she is the centre of her side of this scene, and also that she is running away from the mill. It also stays at her eye-level, putting us in her position and creating relatability and empathy in the audience for Ofelia.We cut back to the Captain and see the camera rapidly pushing past trees to keep up with him and his horse. This creates a fast pace and feeling of movement, and how fast he is moving, and brings the audience into the scene. A wide shot quickly crabs to the right to show that he is ahead of the rest of the soldiers, showing his position at the heads of authority, and his obsession to find the rebels. It also shows how many men he has under his command, and how loyally they follow him into danger, displaying his power and control.
After cutting back to Ofelia, a low-angle shot shows how small she is compared to the rest of the woods, and therefore the daring of her quest, and therefore the danger that she is in. the shot after this one is a high-angle until Ofelia approaches and nears the camera. It then becomes a mid-shot to show that Ofelia is looking out into the woods in adventure. The movement of the camera also keeps the pace going and immerses the audience, making them feel less like an observer to the events in the film but that they are actually in the film, involved in what’s going on.
The camera then arches around her to reveal the tree she is looking for. It also begins to tilt upwards to reveal the full scale of the tree and its scale in comparison to Ofelia, implying how much danger she is in and also framing it like a dominant building, making it feel more intimidating and imposing, like its in control of the environment around it. This also show’s that Ofelia is not at all afraid of the tree, and in the face of mysterious and possibly dangerous forces she is only overcome with curiosity and child-like joy, not fear or apprehension.
The wide-shot shows just how large the tree is compared to Ofelia.
A glance object show’s what she is holding, stones, and this temporary focus on them signifies their importance to the plot. There is also a glance-object of her shoes. This could be a foreshadow to the shoes he gains later on in the film, but here it is primarily for the purpose of signifying how rotten and in-clean this environment around and inside the tree is. A wire shot then brings the camera up to bring the branch into frame, keeping focus on Ofelia and it to show what her expression is like, showing that she has noticed, and what has captured her interest, signifying its importance in this scene.
The camera pulls backwards and pedestals upwards via crane shot to reveal the dress. This shot establishes that Ofelia is now heading straight into the danger, and the dress in kept centre frame to show that it is important that it is placed there, and foreshadows that it will play a part in the film later on, which it does. As Ofelia crawls through the tunnel we cut back to Vidal via hidden cut, but she and him are still moving from left to right, showing a nearing end to their journeys. The lighting in the tunnel is also dark and gloomy, creating an unsafe and uncertain atmosphere, but the lighting is bright enough for us to see Ofelia’s face, keeping her expression clear and visible to the audience. After cutting back to Vidal’s side of the scene, we see a close-up of his boots hitting the floor to establish that he has confident footing, and the force with which he hits the ground signals his intensity and aggressiveness. The camera also follows him and keeps Vidal centre frame to maintain him as the focus of this scene.
There is a glance-object of the fire to create a connection between what Vidal is thinking and why he has come to the conclusion that the rebels are still nearby. The camera then pedestals up and arch’s around the Captains head to show his thought process and also keeps the other soldier in frame, but not at the centre, to show his loyalty to the Captain and show to them audience that he is not saying anything important in this moment. The camera pushes in slowly to show that Vidal has noticed something. A glance-object show’s what he has noticed and the fact that this is important to the Captain, holding the viewer’s attention as an important plot device is revealed.
This low-angle shot frames Ofelia’s as a heroic protagonist.
The antibiotic bottle is kept centre-frame in the close-up shot as the Captain lifts it up to make it obvious to the audience what it is, and why it is important. The Captain himself is also kept centre-frame to keep the audience’s attention on him and his movements. As Vidal shouts into the woods, the camera is positioned in a low-shot from behind him to show where he reckons the rebels are and where he is shouting at, and then a high-angle wide-shot shot from in front of him shows the size of the forest and emphasises that the rebels could be anywhere, building suspense, and also making the audience question whether this shot is from the perspective from the rebels or not. An extreme close up of Vidal then Showa how intense and obsessed Vidal is to the cause of destroying the rebels.
When the rebels are finally revealed, they are all kept in a wide-shot which shows how many there are and how they are all glaring at the soldiers after they retreat. After we cut back to Ofelia, who is now crawling through the tunnel, she, like Vidal was, is kept centre-frame to keep our attention on her and her reaction to the environment around her. A long-shot of the hallway creates suspense, and the camera slowly pushing in creates the feeling os claustrophobia and makes the atmosphere more tense, making us wonder in fear where the danger is coming from and what it will look like.
the toad is revealed by the camera moving from Ofelia to the shot in a single take, building suspense and slowly bringing the toad into frame, showing what it looks like, where it is, and how Ofelia reacts to it. There is then an over-the-shoulder shot from behind the toad, which personify it, adding to the fantasy element of the scene, and also showing how much bigger it is than Ofelia. After the toad licks Ofelia’s face, we see a close-up of her hand that also serves as a match on action to signify that she has dropped the stones, and that this is about to have an important consequence to the scene.
A match-on-action shows her picking them up, and then a wide-shot is done to show how far the toad is from Ofelia, and therefore the power of the burp. The way that the edges of the frame are also covered by mud adds to the feeling of being trapped, immersing the viewer in Ofelia’s situation. The camera then cut’s to a close-up of Ofelia’s hand to show what she has picked up and how this is important. After the toad has died, the camera follows Ofelia to build suspense as she approaches the key, and keep the audience immersed in the moment as a participant in the story, not just a mutual bystander, since we see the key at the same time she does. As she crawls towards the key, we see what it is, and by keeping Ofelia in frame we see that it is her objective to obtain. The key is then kept centre frame, like the antibiotic bottle earlier, to show its importance to the plot and the character. There is then a close-up of Ofelia after she escapes the tree to show how tired and exhausted she is. It also tracks her movements and moves the right enough to reveal that she has lost the dress, and establish the trouble she faces now. The camera also moves back to eye-level to create sympathy for her as she realises the trouble that she is in.
The over-the-shoulder shows the scale of the toad as opposed to Ofelia.
Sound:
As Vidal and his troops leave the mill, the non-diegetic score immediately picks up into an intense and dramatic orchestral tone which is emphasised by trumpets and other horn instruments signalling a grand arrival but with a dark undertone, indicating the power of the men but also their dark and immoral motives. The diegetic sounds also increase suddenly as the scene is quickly filled with the sounds of multiple horse hooves, neighing and the shouts of men. This immerses the audience and also emphasises the intensity of the moment., and the speed and purpose with which the men are moving.
the trumpets decrease in tone and pitch as we cut to Ofelia, but does not put the scene in complete silence as the heroic and exiting tune keeps playing, keeping the audience’s attention and focus on the scene, and not losing the fat and aggressive pace. However we can still hear the muffles and distant sounds of men and horses as we are with Ofelia which immerses us in the setting and makes it feel more realistic. It also establishes that Ofelia and Vidal are leaving the mill at the same time, making the rest of the sequence parallel editing. The contrast between the aggressive and dramatic music that plays when Vidal is on screen and the bright and peaceful and heroic music that plays for Ofelia contrasts their characters.
As Ofelia walks through the forest, we hear the sounds of mud and rustling beneath her feet. This immerses the audience in the setting of the scenes, so even something as small as ambient diegetic sounds can contribute to how much the audience is attached to a scene and environment in a film, including the stones in her hand, which signifies their importance. After reaching the tree, a dramatic horn sound picks up in the mix to foreshadow that something is wrong, and that danger is possibly approaching. This keeps the audience invested and on the edge of their seats and building suspense, and also adds a dark and serious atmosphere to the scene.
The diegetic sounds are drowned out by that of the Roy this beating of horse hooves, showing their force and drive.
As the camera pushes in on the dress, the diegetic sound of wind picks up in the sound mix to signify that something bad is going to happen to the dress, a foreshadow and an explanation for when the dress is found on the ground later on. As we cut to Ofelia inside the tree, the diegetic sounds are muffled and distant, as if from underwater, which creates a tense and uncomfortable environment and atmosphere in the tree, and puts us in Ofelia’s position. A low violin sound picks up in the non-diegetic composed score to signify a tragic aspect of the scene, creating suspense and fear for Ofelia’s safety. A sound of wind rushing also creates a cold and un-safe atmosphere as Ofelia enters the tree and signifies a change into the fantasy world again.
After cutting back to Vidal, the sound of the horses slowly disappears as they leave frame to reduce the sound in the mix, keep the pace slow and calm, and make space for the audience to pay attention to Vidal and what he is saying. The loud and powerful sound of Vidal’s boots hitting the floor temporarily drowns out all others in the sound mix, showing how much authority and dominance the Captain holds over the scene when he is in it.
As he investigates the campsite, we can hear the diegetic sounds of birds tweeting in the forest. These calming and peaceful sounds keep the pace of the scene slow and patient but also prevents the scene from being too quiet as Vidal looks around. It lets us hear his words, immerses us in the scene, and builds suspense without leaving the scene in complete silence. It also contrasts the constipated and muffled sounds of the inside of the tree, helping the viewer adapt to the new setting.
As the Captain shouts into the woods, his voice echoes throughout the trees to shown that the rebels most likely heard him, how truly massive the woods are, and how commanding and intimidating the Captain is. It also implies that even the creatures of the forest cannot escape the influence of the Captain. As we cut to a close-up of Vidal, horn instruments pick up suddenly and sharply in the score again. This subtly symbolises his mounting frustration and disdain for the rebels, and also creates the feeling of fear from something as simple as the look he makes in this moment. The music also builds up to a dramatic reveal of the rebels, and build into a climax as the scene cuts back to Ofelia. The way that the music suddenly cuts out here implies that the scene will be following here from now on.
Vidal is intently staring, even though he cannot see the rebels, attempting to intimidate them and control his rage and fury.
A low and guttural sound emerges in the diegetic sound mix as hits shot of the tunnel continues which builds tension and implies that something large and powerful, possibly dangerous is nearing, building tension and suspense, and therefore keeping the audience’s attention. Once the toad enters frame, it produces deep and rough, wet and moist sounds. These make the audience uncomfortable and evokes disgust in them for the toad. As the camera gets closer to it, the sounds increase in pitch and volume, making the audience more repulsed by the creature and again making them feel more like an actual participant in the movie as opposed to a bystander only witnessing the events.
When the toad burps, the diegetic sounds in the mix massively pick up and the roaring noise overcomes all others. This establishes the toad as a powerful and imposing creature that seems to have dominion over this territory. This moment disturbs the audience and raises the stakes as we now understand that Ofelia is in danger.
After Ofelia picks up the beetle it uncurls itself, and as it does he hear the diegetic sound of scuttling. This makes the insect seem more alive and biotic than a CGI monster, and also establishes to the audience that it is an object of significance in that moment. The score picks up into a hopeful and calm toned moment that signals to the audience that Ofelia has noticed something, as shown in the previous shot, and the music shows that this has led her to a realisation.
The men instantly quieten at this hand gesture, showing Vidal’s authority sand control over them.
When the tongue shoots out from the toads moth, we hear a loud roaring and squelching sound that makes this fantasy creature seem more real and organic, adding a realistic and serious tone to the fairy-tale monster, as if done again in the film later on. As the toad dies, we once again hear roaring but also a cracking sound to match the image of the toad’s jaw unhinging as it dies, adding to the gore of the moment. As its corpse deflates we hear a sound like rushing air, and as Ofelia retrieves the key from the contents of it’s stomach we hear sticky squelching. These diegetic sounds act as an audible sort of mise-en-scen, making the scene feel more real, immersing us by putting us in Ofelia’s position, and making the scene feel more real by adding to the texture of the objects on screen. Non-diegetic sounds also signify items as important though, as seen, or rather heard, when Ofelia picks up the key and a sharp ringing sound emerges in the mix, focusing the viewer’s attention on it.
We again hear wet and sticky sounds as Ofelia wipes her forehead to emphasise just how in-clean she is, creating sympathy in the audience for her, and making them think about just how much she has been through. We are introduced to the new setting outside of the cramped and claustrophobic environment of the tree to the the open and spacious forest by the sound of Ofelia’s footsteps crunching on the leaves beneath them. The distant thunder hints towards the coming thunderstorm, building suspense and an impending feeling of danger and fear for Ofelia.
Editing:
The first hidden cut in the scene is made when the camera moves behind a tree and when it emerges on the other side we are with Ofelia. This serves as a seamless transition that keeps the pace of the scene going and is hard to notice, linking the left to right movement of the characters between shots, and making the transition less jarring and distracting than an ordinary cut.
The scenes are established as parallel since we know that Ofelia and Vidal leave the mill at the same time, and the mid-day lighting implies that these events are happening at the same time. The locations of the different parts of the forest being similar also makes the movement of the scene feel more seamless and more like an uninterrupted sequence and experience of the events on screen. The hidden cuts are also used to keep in the audiences mind that the scenes are taking place parallel to each other. Another hidden cut is made from behind another tree to keep the fast-paced scene of horse-riding not lead to a sudden cut to the more calm and measured scene of Ofelia walking in the woods alone. It also signifies that both characters are approaching their destinations/goals in this moment.
Another hidden cut changes the position of the camera and signifies a passage of time between the cut. Every time a hidden cut is made the characters are kept centre-frame to keep them as the centre of the audience’s attention and they are also moving in the same direction, creating a similarity between both scenes and therefore a seamless transition that keeps the pace going smoothly and not suddenly cutting between shots. Once Ofelia reaches the tree there are no more hidden cuts. This is done to slow the pace of the scene and build suspense without cutting back to Vidal. This is continuity editing, since the lack of hidden cuts allows for the scene to play out before us in-interrupted, letting the audience follow the scene with clarity thanks to the continuity and lack of transitions.
This tree is not used for a hidden-cut, making those that are unexpected, and immersing the audience in the scene since they cannot guess when it will cut, and the trees obstructing the view makes it feel like we, the audience, are actually there, in the forest.
After Ofelia enters the tree, a hidden cut is made from the tunnel to a tree, and from there we are following Vidal again, making the change again smooth and not at all surprising, since it has been done before in the scene and the audience has a slit second more than they would with a normal cut to interpret the new environment of the scene. It also keeps hold on the audience’s attention throughout the scene, keeping them involved in the story and immersed in the. narrative.
The camera only does another hidden cut from behind a tree to show a passage of time, as the horses are further away afterwards, and change the position of the camera to where the rebels are standing, revealing where they were watching from all along. The scene does not do a hidden transition back to Ofelia to imply that the scene will be following her from now on.
As Ofelia talks to the toad, there are shot-reverse-shots that personify it, and therefore make it feel like a much more real and organic creature, making the audience question whether or not it is all in Ofelia’s imagination. It also makes for room to show off how large and indifferent the toad is to Ofelia, making the audience concerned but also fascinated in the huge monster on screen.
The wide-shot shows the rebels and we=here they were watching from. The movement of the horses from right to left also signifies that they are now going back to where they came from, retreating.
Mise-en-scen:
Ofelia’s outfit is quaint and simple, a clear reference to typical fairy-tale protagonists who were from humble beginnings and would wander off into the woods on some grand quest, as she does in this scene. It also looks similar to Alice from Alice in Wonderlands dress, creating a link between the two characters, and their story’s. The book she is reading is large and antique, signifying the grand scale and ancient legend of her stories, and the one that she herself is creating.
The tree, once it enters frame, is large, old and rotten. This adds to the still a new tense atmosphere of the scene, and making is teem much more imposing and intimidating than the other trees in the forest, and matching the description of the fairy-tale, giving the first grain of truth to the seemingly childish story. The entrance is shrouded in darkness, making it seem feel more mysterious and dangerous, and creating fear in the viewer for Ofelia’s safety. The tree itself is also shaped like a uterus, adding tonic themes to the film by serving as hidden imagery/symbolism to create deeper and subtler messages in the film. The ribbon that flys off the dress foreshadows the affect that the wind will have on the dress later on.
As Ofelia enters the tree there can be seen dusty particles in the air, giving the scene a surreal and fairy-tale like atmosphere, and thereby immersing the audience in the setting of the tree, and making it easier to understand what Ofelia is going through, literally! The inside of the tree itself in completely coated in mud and dirt, infested with large and unsettling insects, cramped by withering branches. This setting is uncomfortable for the audience to see, and the other aspects of the scene, especially cinematography and sound, make us feel out of place and nervous as Ofelia explores it, showing her bravery and bringing to life these ancient grim fairy tales. The mud collecting on Ofelia’s previously neat outfit shows how little she cares about it, and her persistence to drive on, whilst most, if not all, people in the audience would of turned back by now.
This wide-shot is used to show how many rebels there are, and their fire-power.
As Vidal investigates the fireplace, there is still steam coming off of it, acting as a visual clue that the rebels only recently left. The antibiotic bottle is small and clear, implying that it is valuable and also allowing for the audience to see it clearly. The Uniforms of the soldiers are very straight and clean and also a deep shade of blue, a sharp contrast to the green, in-organised and dirty woods around them, implying that they do not belong there. The gear and weapons they brought with them does indicate their power though, and willingness to commit violence. Their uniforms also contrast and conflict with those of the rebels, which is darker, less done-up and fashionable, like a personification of the woods themselves, and also showing that they are literally more suited and adapt, even in control of the environment of the forest. The weapons are also heavily armed, showing that they, like the Captain, and even though we haven’t seen it yet, are also willing to commit acts of violence for their cause.
Back in the tree, Ofelia now has dried mud on her face, signifying a passage of time. The toad is covered in bumps and rubbery looking skin, with thick and slimy saliva drooling from its mouth. It has long eyelashes and goat eyes, a huge moth and wet and sticky tongue. All of these factors in its physical appearance contribute to it evoking feelings of disgust and repulsion in the viewer, who as a result has a physical reaction to what they before just suspected was a harmless fairy tale, emphasising the real life scale and danger of these stories.
The toad is warty and ugly, creating repulsion and disgust in the viewer.
After the toad licks Ofelia’s hand, it is completely coated by slime and muck, making the audience sympathise for Ofelia, but also admire her bravery and lack of fear at this mighty beast, signifying her dedication to become the princess. As the toad deflates, its previously rubbery and wet skin now looks slightly like plastic, or a deflating balloon, instantly reducing the power of the animal and the fear it evoked whilst kit was alive, once again immersing the audience in the reality where the toad is not a reality, and therefore not a threat. In other words, the toad is not as monstrous when it is alive and breathing.
It’s(previously) insides are orange and made of slime, creating more repulsion in the audience as the camera nears it, and ensuring that the disgusting nature of the creature, if not the fear it evoked, is still alive after the toad dies. After Ofelia finally leaves the tree, her hair is completely plastered down by slime, her face covered in mud, and clothes soaked. This creates sympathy for her and the detail of the filth helps for us to imagine how much she has been through and how she feels in that moment.
Performance:
We can tell that Ofelia is running away from the mill from her sudden break into a run after turning back to indicate that she heard the soldiers setting off and momentarily thought that they were after her. She seems curious and full of wonder as she explored the woods, showing her excitement at being a part of the fairy-tales she has read about for so long. She seems cautious as she enters the tree, showing that she knows their could be danger about, but she makes no hesitation as she approaches the tree, indicating her bravery and fascination. As she crawls through the tree, her uncomfortable expression and laboured breathing shows that she is apprehensive and possibly re-considering her depiction tom go this far, but most of her reaction seems to be out of disgust as she studies the tunnel she is in.
The mud on Ofelia id dirtied here to show that’s she has been down in the tunnel for some amount of time.
The Captain also acts with intense purpose and authority as he approaches the fire, refusing to break his gaze from it, indicating to the audience what is important in this moment. As the Captain holds his hand up, his soldiers instantly silence themselves. This quickly establishes his power and authority over three, their loyalty and the un-caring and in-human nature of the Captain. Vidal seems sure in himself as he assesses the campsite, and even more confident that the rebels are nearby, signifying his skill and experience as a military leader. As approaches the tree line, he once again refuses to break his gaze, making him come across as a sort of un-caring machine, completely obsessed with carrying out its purpose, and shows Vidal’s inner anger and hatred for the rebels. Vidal’s voice as he shouts out into the woods is extremely booming and powerful, assuming control of the entire area around him.
The submissive silence of his men here also shows his authority over them, and his willingness to take charge. His dark and brooding expression hints at the the evil and disturbing things that must go on in Vidal’s mind, and also references the look he made as he killed the two farmers, showing how he always looks that calm yet intent. It also shows how inwardly infuriated he is over being too late to stop the rebels, and that they are probably just out of his reach and sight, but still has enough command to control his emotions, except for when he brutalises innocent people in cuts of um-measured rage, but even that he does with a cool and collected look on his face. There is another sign of his authority as the men instantly follow his suit from a gesture as simple and him holding up his hand. He also does not wait for them to follow him, because he know that they will follow his commands exactly as he says to. Or rather, signals to.
The jaw can be heard in-hinging in the diegetic sound mix to make the moment more impactful.
As Ofelia questions the toad, she seems genuinely confused at why it chooses to live down there, showing that she does not question the reality of what she is seeing, but rather the more mundane and simple questions about it. E.G not why is there a giant frog, but rather why he likes to live in the tree. It also shows her childish imagination/wonder and her fearlessness. She does seem concerned when she loses the stones though, keeping in the viewers’ mind that she is still a child, just one mostly concerned with completing a magical quest.
She looks fascinated and even hypnotised as she approaches the key, showing her dedication/devotion to getting it. After leaving the tree, Ofelia wipes her forehead and sighed, breathing heavily and leaning against the tree, emphasising her exhaustion and allowing for the audience to put themselves in her shoes. She also seems more vulnerable once outside of the tree, showing that she is much more comfortable, strangely in the wet and muddy underworld of the fantasy world, rather than the real one where Vidal has the power, signifying that he, a single man, evokes more fear in her than the giant toad and claustrophobic tunnel filled with insects was.
The razor that the Captain holds is sharp and imposing, a clear symbol of his tendency for violence and aggressive solutions, whether for dealing with rebels or shaving. The ring is on his left hand, which may be means to symbolise Vidal’s false love for his wife. The gramophone he plays music on is showed to display his wealth, and contrasts him to the peasants shown in the rest of the film. This establishes the power he holds over the area and the rations. Throughout the shaving sequence, Vidal has no uniform on, which signals two the audience that he is alone and in a truly private moment, but even here he carry’s himself with dignity and pride, as he is that obsessed with image and integrity as a military leader.
The cigarette also shows Vidal’s control of luxury resources like tobacco, and the smoke illuminated by the light coming into the basement hangs around his head gives him an intimidating presence, almost like smoke steam from the nose of a stag. The cigarette is also shorter after a hidden cut, which shows a passage of time. The many scattered and stacked papers at Vidal’s desk show his efficiency and attentiveness to his work, and the various shaving equipment also hints at his obsession with maintaining a clean and pristine appearance.
This shot is made more biblical by the light and symbolism of the razor, and the low-angle shot that makes a monster out force out of Vidal.
The cogs and mechanisms that are seen in the background of the basement are symbolic of Vidal’s efficiency and machine-like personality. He has no emotion, only an end goal and mission to destroy the rebels. This shows that he is a truly cruel and viscous villain to the otherwise fairy-tale aspects of the story, like a human form of the various monsters seen in the rest of the movie.
The boot that Vidal polishes is very shiny and clean, and this signify that it was probably expensive and also signify, again, the Captains attentiveness to how he looks, and his pride in being a Captain. This is also seen in how tidy and neat his uniform is, especially in contrast with the more humble and simple design of Mercedes’ and the kitchen staff outfits. The dining table is long, which shows that it was likely expensive (it also eludes to the later one “place man” sequence, showing how much of a monster Vidal is) and the mug is large and the fireplace completely stocked with wood, and also big and imposing. This all contributes to subtly signalling to the audience the military’s, or more specifically the Captains control over the ration’s and resources and money in this area of Spain, and his power that comes with being a military official in a fascist country. This can also be seen with the amounts of buckets and food in the kitchen.
Vidal clearly takes pride in this ritual of masculinity and dominance most people call shaving.
Cinematography:
There is a close-up of the gramophone to bring attention to it and the Captains hand, which the camera then follows upwards until it lands on Vidal’s face. There is a mid-shot here to make room for the razor, Vidal’s face, and the light coming into the basement behind him. This is also a low-angle shot, looking up at Vidal to make him seem more intimidating and imposing to the audience. The shot here almost looks like a portrait, the light giving a biblical sense to the image, and the razor a symbol of Vidal’s violence and power. This shows the Captains inflated perception of himself and his status as a Captain.
The camera then moves from a mid-shot to a long-shot as Vidal walks towards the mirror. This allows for us to see the entire basement and his position in the centre of it. This symbolises his authority and status in the centre of the mill as the Captain, and also his small part in a much bigger fascist machine. The camera then arches around the mirror to push into a close-up of the Captains face as he shaves, forcing the audience to get closer to him and see the precision with which he shaves, how he has no hesitation in using a dangerous razor, and how impassive he looks as he does it, a reference to the face he made as he killed the farmers earlier, calm and casual.
The over the shoulder shot shows how much taller Vidal is than Mercedes, and puts us in her position, letting the audience know how intimidating he is.
A glance object shot shows us all of the equipment that the Captain us using to shave, showing, again, his particular carefulness with creating an appearance. Once the Captain is in the dining room, the lighting is hazier and warmer, a sharp contrast to the cold and metallic environment of Vidal’s room. This also eludes to the contrast between Vidal and Mercedes as characters. The camera pedestals up as Vidal stands, which shows how much taller he is than Mercedes.
This is re-enforced when we cut to an over-the-shoulder shot of Vidal leaning down to intimidate Mercedes, which shows how imposing and threatening he is physically. This shot is also very tight, which creates a feeling of claustrophobia and fear in the audience, of Vidal. The camera then cuts to a wide-shot to show the entrance to the kitchen and how Vidal menacingly stared at Mercedes as she leaves. Only we, the audience, see this, so only we know that he may have suspicions of, or dark intentions for her.
Sound:
The non-diegetic sound of the gramophone picks up in the mix as Vidal turns it on. The audio is loud and slightly scratchy, which immerses the audience in the time period. The music is also very grand and patriotic in nature, which shows Vidal’s sense of patriotism and self-pride/image. The razor produces diegetic sounds that are sharp and sudden. This establishes how sharp the razor is and therefore how much danger Vidal is putting himself in by using it. It also puts the audience on edge slightly, since it is an unpleasant and rough sound that makes the audience feel uncomfortable, which they are supposed to with Vidal on screen, since the is so menacing.
The music also comes to a climax as Vidal begins shaving , which shows how he views this simple activity as a sort of symbol of his power, authority and masculinity. The grand and powerful tone of the music symbolises his obsession with how he presents himself and how he goes about completing his mission. The complexity and liveliness of the music also serves as a stark contrast to Vidal’s otherwise passive and calm expression.
Vidal is careful yet fast as he handles the sharp razor, showing his daring and confidence.
No music is played when Vidal is in the dining room. This creates tension and keeps focus on what he and Mercedes are saying. It also makes what seems like a vaguely awkward conversation come across as a lot more intense and threatening, as the awkward silence combines with the Captains terrifying demeanour to evolve into a disturbing silence that hangs in the air as thick as fog. This all emphasises the fear that Vidal creates in the audience, and the effect on the people around him, including Mercedes, who’s perspective we see here. As Mercedes enters the kitchen, there are many diegetic sounds of metal and glass inserted to emphasise how busy the staff are, and also the amount of rations they have, and immerses the audience in the environment, of only for a few moments.
Performance:
As Vidal goes about the basic task of shaving his face, he seems to be taking great care and joy even in it. This is seen in how he carry’s himself around the room confidently, asserting his power over the environment. His movements are fluid and constant, showing how much pride he takes in maintaining his appearance. The seriousness and attentiveness with which Vidal shaves his face eludes to how he goes about his work as a Captain, efficient and concentrated. The face he makes as he looks in the mirror is also very similar to the one he made as he killed the farmer’s son earlier, showing that he truly had no regret or remorse/hesitation as he murdered that man.
He also makes the activity of shaving almost like a ritual, in the way that he plays music and apples the cream with a brush, carefully studies the blade before using it, smokes and study’s his face in the mirror, and uses a hot towel to get ready. This all contributes to our perception of the Captain, and how he seems so obsessed with himself, his country, career and appearance. This is also seen in the dining room as he intently stares at his boot as he cleans it.
Mercedes answers back to the Captain, which eludes to her role as a rebel, and also her silent disdain and hatred for the Captain. He responds by asserting himself by standing up and placing a hand on her shoulder. This solidify Vidal as a threatening and dominant figure who is fine with keeping people in line by using fear as a tactic. Mercedes’ concerned expression shows this. The way that the kitchen staff also seem happy and even joke when not in the presence of the Captain creates a less tense and uncomfortable atmosphere, emphasising the effect that Vidal has on people by creating that same effect on the audience.
Mercedes is clearly quieter after Vidal’s threatening words.
Editing:
The scene is done in a lone-take until the camera crabs behind a pillar in the basement. As it passes through the darkness, a hidden cut is made, since when it emerges time has passed and the cameras is in a new location. This makes the shaving sequence almost seem like one long cut, which makes the various cuts seamless and un-noticeable. This keeps all focus on the Captain, and also makes the pacing of the scene match the fluid and precise movements of the Captain match each other. The pacing also matches up to the intense and fast music, and keeps the audience up to speed with the course of events in this scene, as we understand them to be continuous, which makes this continuity editing.
There is also another hidden cut when the camera moves behind the Captains head. This could be done to ssymbolise the fact that we, the audience, do not know what goes on inside Vidal’s head, what his inner-thoughts are, which makes him all the more terrifying. It also then brings us into a wide-shot of the basement, but then the scene cuts to the kitchen. The cuts that show a passage of time make this temporal editing, done to progress the story and keep the basic scene of Vidal shaving brief and filled with symbolism, not content, and progress the story more. A cut is possibly used here to end the fluid and constant movement/pacing of the scene before and brings the audience into the new environment. There are few cuts from here, as the shaving sequence is over and now Vidal is not alone, and the focus of the scene has switched from him to Mercedes, which is done by leaving Vidal off-screen as she leaves into the kitchen.
The shot where Ofelia and her mother are talking in the bed is one long and continuous shot. The director avoids cutting here to keep attention and focus on the two characters and their dialogue. The shot also slows down the pace of the film and prepares the audience to hear this story. The camera then pedestals downward in a fluid and floaty movement to create the feeling of a fairy-tale narration. The darkness on screen is used to make the transition and enter into Ofelia’s mothers womb, and then the camera dolly’s right and once again enters darkness to reveal the fairy-tale world. the same thing happens with the rose. It takes a moment to realise that the scene is now in a different environment, making it feel surreal and dream-like. The movement is created by the transitions and feels constant as it avoids making cuts and keeps moving throughout the sequence. It also makes the change from the CGI setting to a real one un-noticeable. The dream-like feel is also achieved by only using movements like pedestals and pans and crab shots. The transitions are fades, which blurs the line between reality and the fairy-tale.
The whole sequence is also done in continuity editing, since the events take place in chronological order. Finally the camera pedestals down to reveal the Captains room, once again secretly transitioning through the dark floor. A J-cut is used at the end of the scene to show the doctors reaction to the Captains threatening words, before cutting to the next scene. This also links the scenes together and establishes that no time has passed since the end of the scene with the doctor and the start of the scene with the farmers. A long take again slows down the pace of the film, creating a contrast between this and when the scene begins cutting rapidly as the farmer’s son is killed. The editing also matches the pace of the action, as here with an intense and violent burst of movement. The cuts between the Captain and the farmer’s son also shows his reaction, which is impassive and calm, to the disgusting act that he is committing. The pace of the editing also becomes sedate and slow as the action ends, matching, again, the movement of the characters.
Cinematography:
The room in which Ofelia and her mother are is very cold and dark, shown trough the blue tinted and silvery colour palette which also gives it a gloomy and dull atmosphere. It pans to the left to follow Ofelia and bring into frame the fireplace and bed. This serves as an establishing shot used to build the atmosphere of the room and follow Ofelia’s movements, keeping her as the centre of frame and therefore scene. When both characters are on the bed together a wide shot is used to keep focus on them and their dialogue, but also makes room for the darkness on the right side of the screen, building more atmosphere and tension. The shot also leaves plenty of empty space above the characters to create the feel of the large and empty room, and also makes makes the engravings on the bed frame clear to the audience. The camera slowly dolly’s forwards as the conversation continues, bringing the audience further into the scene.
The camera then pedestals downwards and transitions into a new environment. Then it crabs to the right and again transitions to a new place, pedestals down and crabs right, finally falling into an arch shot around the bed. These fluid and smooth movements make the scene play out like a story, which is narrated by Ofelia. Therefore, the camera movements contribute to the fairy-tale aspect of this scene, and almost makes it feel like a dream.
A low-angle shot is used here to give the audience a sense of scale of the mountain.
The doctor is kept at eye-level in the scene in the basement, perhaps to contrast how the Captain is usually above the camera in low-angle shots, and this subtly implies that the Captain is a better person that Vidal. Meanwhile, Vidal is sat in a chair shown to be looking up at the doctor, which signals that he has some dependancy on the doctor for looking after his wife and child. This changes after the captain stands up though, when he is once again shown from a low-angle shot. This and the over-the-shoulder shot from behind the Captain show how much taller the Captain is than the doctor, making him an intimidating presence and showing his superiority over the doctor. The soldiers are kept in the background and out of focus to keep the audiences attention on the doctor, but they are kept in frame to increase tension and block the exit, which gives the scene a tense and uncomfortable atmosphere.
The camera arch’s around the mill to follow the Captains movement, and the fact that he is between the two soldiers shows that he is the centre of focus for this scene. The shot of him searching the bag is long and goes not cut until he starts attacking the farmer’s son. This gives time for the situation to be explained by the soldiers, the farmers to plead their innocence, and tension to be built as Vidal searches their possessions. The dialogue establishes the stakes, and the shot makes for suspense building, and also illuminates the harm already done to the farmer, which implies that the soldiers are brutal and cruel. Vidal’s previous behaviour makes the audience wonder and fear to what extent he will punish the farmers if he finds anything too incriminating. The camera also slowly dolly’s forward again to build tension, immerse the audience, and establish how claustrophobic the farmers feel, completely surrounded by soldiers.
The camera quickly cuts between the Captain and the farmer’s son to show the violence that he is committing, and then the calm and neutral expression he wears on his face as he does it, showing how evil and cruel he is. One shot of Vidal also shows the farmer in the background, showing his reaction to the brutal scene in front of him, making the scene all the more stressful and intense. The low-angle shot makes it feel like Vidal is towering above us, making him all the more intimidating. There is also a close-up of the brutalised mans face to display how horrific the violence is. A wide shot is used to show how Vidal casually fires rounds into the two men, and how the soldiers just stand around, looking at this happen. Vidal is also always kept centre frame to show that he has authority and the centre of the attention in this scene. This displays Vidal’s authority, and the fear he puts into people, and how dangerous he is too.
The next shot is an over-the-shoulder from behind one of the soldiers, and this shows who Vidal is talking to, what his expression is, and the left side of the screen has space for the rabbit corpse in the bag, implying that Vidal murdered the two men for nothing. The shot then lingers on two soldiers to show how they reacted to the murders, and this imply that even Vidal’s own men are afraid of him, and opposed to his brutal actions/methods.
Sound:
As Ofelia walks from the door to the bed, diegetic sounds of her footsteps and the fireplace are comforting and homely, building a warm and safe atmosphere. The creaking and sounds from the house build a tense and eerie atmosphere, and the sound of laboured breathing from Ofelia’s mother implies that they are on edge. The non-diegetic score builds as Ofelia’s mother opens up to her about her loneliness. It is slow and somber, and prepares/signals the audience that there is about to be another scene in the fantasy world, and also emphasises the gothic tone of the film, and the emotions Ofelia and her mother are feeling.
When we see the baby, the heartbeat can be heard in the background, muffled and slow, and this is possibly done to show the relationship building between Ofelia and her brother. Diegetic wind and other cold, ambient sounds play, as the camera movements. This adds an ominous quality to the scene, and also adds to the sense of movement through the story, and the cold outside environment. The diegetic sounds of the insect increases the closer it is to the camera, immersing the audience. The sound of the score also gets louder as the scene goes on, and the choir like sounds to it give it a religious quality, that emphasises the beauty of the story, and lends it a small sense of truth.
When Vidal finishes fixing his watch, it begins ticking to a rhythm, showing that there is a purpose to it for Vidal, signifying importance. The sounds are also mechanical, creating a link between Vidal’s cruel and cold efficiency and the machine he holds. The ticking is also heard over the conversation about Ofelia’s mother, and this creates the sense that time is running out for her. As Vidal and his soldiers walk outside, the diegetic sounds of their footsteps create the atmosphere of the outside of the mill, and the Captains footsteps are louder than the others, implying authority and dominance, and get louder as he gets closer to the camera, making him seem more intimidating and making the audience feel like they are actually in the scene.
The important objects can be heard more, as with the watch and the bottle. The diegetic sound of the Captain slamming the bottle lid down implies that he has snapped, and lost patience. The diegetic sounds of the mans face being bashed in gets louder and wetter as the scene goes on, emphasising the gore and brutality, and creating more of an impact on the audience. The score also picks up here, making the situation more distressing and disturbing. The gunshots can also be heard echoing, once again building atmosphere and the dominance/authority of the Captain, and the fear he creates in people.
The non-diegetic score builds in intensity as the scene progresses, which makes the murder all the more hard to watch for the audience. The scene once again goes silent as Vidal walks away, slowing the pace and intensity of events, but still leaving the audience and the guards on edge from what trust happened.
Mise-en-scen:
The moonlight in the scene gives the room a gothic and theatrical feel. The design of the fire and the rest of the room is quite gothic, which builds atmosphere and adds to the tone of the room. The lighting on Ofelia and her mother is very soft and smooth, showing the warm and loving relationship between them. The bed frame also has a similar design to the underworld in the beginning of the film. It resembles goat horns or a uterus, which acts as symbolism and foreshadowing. The clothes that Ofelia is wearing is quite humble and simple and symbolises her as a kind person, who does not show off. The make-up on both characters is also naturalistic, and does not seem done-up or over-done, but genuine and reflective of the characters it’s on.
The blanket is black so that the un-seen transition can be made. The red colour of the womb matches that of the rose, dark and deep, allowing for another transition and creating a dark and ominous atmosphere. The hill that the rose sits on seems rough and brittle, implying danger and matching the narration of how people were scared to climb it, and the sky looks like a storm is brewing, making the atmosphere of the setting gloomy and grim. The thorny branches are also very foreboding and sharp.
The CGI gives the creatures and environment in the story scene seem fantastical and unreal. The basement is filled with gears and tools, which reflects the cold and precise efficiency with which Vidal operates. It also looks like a clock, which links to the stopwatch he is fixing in that scene. Vidal’s uniform is decorated and pristine, showing that he takes his profession seriously and is very strict with how he presents himself. The doctor is dressed well to show that he is professional and that the Captain trusts him, but is less done up and up-tight with his appearance.
The smoke coming off Vidal’s cigarette gives him an intimidating and confident appearance. It is also a symbol of wealth, to show that he is in control of the goods and resources that other people need and want, such as the peasants. The setting of the mill in the woods is similar to many old fantasy book and fairy tale tropes, which establishes an atmosphere for the film, and also makes the area feel more remote and isolated, therefore trapped and claustrophobic.
The soldiers all have clean and tidy uniforms, which reflects how obedient they are to the Captain. The farmers, on the other hand, have dirty and rugged outfits, which shows that they are poor, and provides a direct contrast to the Captain. It also implies that they work hard, struggle to make money, and, like Ofelia, are more honest and good people than Vidal is. The blood and bones that are shown as the farmer’s son is brutalised emphasises the aggressive nature of the Captain, and the extent of how cruel and awful this crime is. It is repulsive for the audience to see, and solidify the Captain as an evil, unforgivable villain.
The rabbit body is held up, and its limp and still body hanging by the ears instantly signals to the audience that the farmers were telling the truth, and therefore the Captain brutally injured two men.
It also looks like a crime scene in this low angle wide shot. Even when the camera gets further away from the violence, we are still engrossed yet mortified by the scene playing out in front of us.
Performance:
Ofelia looks happy to see her mother as she walks across the room. After the chaotic and in-happy events of the previous day, this context and facials expression shows that she has a good relationship with her mother. However, It also shows that Ofelia and her mother an only feel safe together when the Captain is not there, as Ofelia’s previous reactions to the Captain show that she does not trust him. Ofelia is evidently scared as she looks frantically around the room and stays close to her mother for comfort.
Ofelia’s mother is clearly uncomfortable, and we, the audience, subconsciously realise that this is due to the baby, as she has struggled with them before this scene. We also see her mothers’ face go dull and take a conflicted and hurt expression. This establishes how she feels guilt for her daughter, but also feels she had no choice to marry the captain, which makes him seem even more evil to the audience. The way that Ofelia narrates the story is also very full of bravado and confidence, which imply that she knows the story well, and this links with her already established love for fairy-tales.
The Captains expression is intent and concentrated, which shows how important the watch is to him. The doctor seems concerned and uncomfortable around the Captain, which implies that he is afraid of him. The Captain is also shown to be the figure of authority over the doctor, since he does not look up to address him when he walks in. The small hand gesture also shows how much power he has over his men, and how used he is to having people obey him instantly. The doctor also recognises his authority, as he stops talking immediately. This implies to the audience the danger that’s the Captain poses.
Vidal also seems offended when the doctor asks why he has assumed the gender of the child, shown by the way he slowly blows out smoke and looks down his nose at him, almost as if he’s been challenged. This shows the aggressive and impatient personality of the Captain. The soldiers walk behind Vidal, subtly showing his rank above them. The farmers seem breathless and concerned, and the son takes his hat off as soon as he’s told. This shows that they know something the audience does not, how dangerous he is, which builds tension and fear of what Vidal is capable of. Vidal even seems too be taking pleasure in the interrogation, they way he tells the men what to do so much, which shows how sadistic he is.
The way the Captain slams the bottle lid down is aggressive, and the way he does not brake his gaze as he approaches and murders the man shows the extent of how evil and heartless he is, as-well as the calm and disappointed look on his face as he kills the man. The soldiers also make no reaction, which signals that they too are scared of him, and have seen this sort of violence before. This contrasts with the farmers terrified and expected reaction to such violence. Only when Vidal leaves do the soldiers react, and that shows how scared they are of him, and that he is the only person there with no sort of remorse, guilt or repulsion to what he just did.
We have studied the opening sequence of Pan’s Labyrinth and have picked out the different key elements of film form in it, going into detail about how each one has been done to covey information or meaning to the audience.
Cinematography: The sequence starts off with a unique camera movement. The camera crabs to the left to show Ofelia bleeding, then twists right to make her lying eye-level with the camera and therefore the audience. This puts them in the environment of the scene, which is made cool and dull by the silvery and grey colour palette used here, and also focuses all attention on Ofelia, signifying her importance, and that this scene must hold significant importance in the course of the narrative. It also puts the camera in position to push into Ofelia’s eye, and a fast and CGI transition into the underworld kingdom implies a change in place and time-period, also creating a sense of fantasy and mystical nature. once we have entered the kingdom, the camera pans left to cover an extreme wide-shot of the kingdom. This shows the audience how huge and seemingly powerful and grand it all is. It also provides the mise-en-scen, which I will go into later, plenty of space to be put on display.
The extreme wide-shot also provides ample room to show the princess, Moana, escaping the kingdom, which is being explained for context by the narrator, which fits into editing.
The camera then pushes in to bring our attention to Moana and her escape, and then tilts upwards to reveal the huge staircase, keep Montana at the forefront of the audiences attention, and also allows for the soundtrack to build up to the blinding light that follows. here the screen is over-exposed to put the audience in Moana’s position, blinded and shocked by an intense light. it also makes for another smooth and seamless transition into the upper-world, which has a different colour palette to show a different place, temperature and once again, time-period. the camera then slowly crabs right to let the new setting sink in whilst the narrator continues, and also so a skeleton can be revealed, making it clear that violence will be prevalent in the film, and also establishing the conflict that is the backdrop of the Spanish Civil War. It then floats up to bring to our attention the cars driving past, and the abandoned church and mass-expanse of woodland.
We then see a close-up of Ofelia’s fairy-tale book, which signals that it is important to her, shows an illustration that hints at Ofelia’s state later on in the film, and shows that fairy-tales and fantasy elements are also going to be a present theme in the film. there are multiple over-the-shoulder and two-shots in the car to show Ofelia’s conversation with her mother. As Ofelia walks around the woods, the camera drops to her level, putting the audience, once again, in her situation, and also showing that she is the centre of the films focus. Even the tilt to the sky mimics where she is looking. The focus on the stone on the floor establishes it as an object of significance, and also Ofelia’s noticing of it. We then cut to a close-up of Ofelia’s face to see that she has noticed something that has caught her attention, bringing in the audience as this captures their attention.
The architecture of the altar matches that of the underworld, and the holes in the eye creates a clear link/connection between it and the stone.
There is an match-on-action to bring our attention on Ofelia picking up the rock, then a close-up to display the unusual formation on it. The over the shot of Ofelia and the statue also makes it look as if the statue is a character itself, contributing to the mystery and suspense of the whole scene. The camera slowly pushes in on the mouth of the altar to ensure that the audiences tension is on it, this way making sure that they have some reaction to the bug that crawls out of it. An over-the-shoulder shot shows Ofelia’s reaction to it. The way that the camera follows the bug also shows Ofelia’s perspective.
The camera follows the insect as it flys away, but keeps Ofelia in shot and the her as the object as focus, this is to show her delight as she looks at the fairy, and remind the audience that the insect is important in relation to her, as she is the protagonist. The insect only leaves frame when Ofelia’s mother enters it, and puts her and the officer in focus to show that this trance that Ofelia was in whilst looking at the insect has been broken to an extent. As the insect/fairy crawls around the trunk of the tree the camera lowers and arcs to follow it and imply to the audience that it is certainly following the truck and cars.
The close-up on Vidal’s watch signifies it significance to him, much like the earlier shot of Ofelia’s book, how it is shown even before them. The close-up also brings attention to how there is a crack on the watch, making the audience wonder why that is there. There is then a close-up on his face to show his importance as a character, and then the camera pans right to follow the cars and reveal the mill and setting of the film to the audience, an establishing shot.
The slow dolly in this shot allows for the audience to take in the environment, statues, which are part of the mise-en-scen, and Moana’s placement here, and her size compared to the rest of the architecture. It also gives the narrator more time to explain the fairy-tale playing out in front of us.
Sound:
The silence included in the opening credits build suspense, and then the diegetic sound of wind and an owl hooting establishes an atmosphere that’s is cold and outside. The lullaby is used as a motif to create suspense and put the audience on edge as it and the wind gradually rise in the mix, which by now is layered due to the different sounds of the woods and Ofelia’s breathing and Mercedes’ humming, slowly bringing the audience into the scene before we even see anything.
the breathing also adds to the tension, making the audience wonder why it is there. A windy swooshing noise is played during the transition to the underworld, making it feel cold and subtly hinting at a change in atmosphere, and matching the speed of the camera, making it feel more like we are actually there, in the scene. The crows cawing adds a dark undertone to the sound mix, as the birds are traditionally associated with themes of death, like a dark foreshadowing, and reference to the pervious shot of Ofelia dying.
The swooshing sound and the crows cawing again signals a change in atmosphere, and hints at the theme of death that is about to be shown in the form of a rotting skeleton. The score has a choral quality to it, establishing the old time-period and eerie atmosphere. The non-diegetic score stops when the conversation starts to keep our attention on it. The sound of the car braking is quick and sharp, showing that there has been a stop and also that the drivers are likely efficient. The diegetic sounds of the cars and people fades away as Ofelia walks off, putting us in her position and distracted mindset.
As Ofelia picks up the stone, the non-diegetic score picks up again, in-concisely making a link in the audiences mind between the underworld and the rock. The sound stops as the camera pushes into the mouth on the stone, helping to build tension and keep the audience as attention on the stone, not the music. The sounds of the insect are quick and clicks, which are uncomfortable to listen to, and these stop as Ofelia’s mother calls to her, breaking the trance made by the focus on the insect. When we see Vidal’s watch, we hear the rhythmic clicking of it, implying that the captain has a close eye on time and orderliness.
Editing:
The captions are edited in to allow English audiences to understand what is being said. The scene where Ofelia is bleeding out is also played in revere, showing that this scene takes place at the end of the film and also gives the scene an unreal and fantastical element.The transition to the underworld is done without making any cuts, since it pushes into her eye and then we discover that there has been a change in environment. This is done to make the flow between places and time periods seem fluid and even in-noticeable. The character of Moana also seems to be edited in, making her movement seem flowing and dream-like. The scene in the underworld is one long and continuous cut that makes the sequence feel like a dream, and the way that it is constantly moving forward makes it feel like the words on the page of a book, which, of course, it is.
The transition to the upper-world is also done without cutting, instead through a flash of blinding light. The only cut we notice fades in as the camera passes a wall, and is hard to notice at first. The scene only cuts when Ofelia reaches the end of the fairy-tale. As Ofelia walks through the woods, the camera follows her and the scene does not cut for a few moments. This lets the atmosphere and setting of the woods sink in, and also keeps the audiences attention as we approach the rock on the ground. When the scene cuts to Captain Vidal at the mill, it is a J-cut since we hear the ticking of the watch before we see it, and this lets the audience know beforehand that something of significance is about to be shown.
The conversation always stays on one side of the invisible 180 degree axis.
Mise-en-scen:
The blood dripping from Ofelia’s nose signals to the audience that she is dying, as-well as that blood on her hand. The architecture in the Nader world kingdom is large and ancient and grand, implying that it is old and powerful, and it also creates the feel of a place from a fairy-tale. The statues shown near the stairs are very similar to those of ancient Egyptian art, which establishes the inspiration for the kingdoms design, and also the pillars are similar to those of Ancient Rome. The immediate debris and destruction that we see on the surface immediately shows the destruction and chaos of the war. So does the rotting skeletons, which also links back to what the narrator is saying about Moana’s death when she reached the surface world.
One of the skeletons also has a pair of glasses next to it, a clear foreshadow of the doctors death later on in the film. The Cars are Rolls-Royce’s which shows that the army has a clear budget to spend, and so are Ofelia and her mothers’ clothiers, showing that they are likely from the city. Even the book is designed to look like an old, antique fairy-tale book.
The design of the stone creates a sense of mystery and attracts the audiences interest, and then when it fits into the rock, we see that the rock has a similar design to those buildings in the under world, establishing a link between them. The design of the bug is intricate, sharp and deadly-looking, creating a feeling of repulsion to it in the audience. The guns that the soldiers are holding signal that Ofelia and her mother are extremely important to them ands have reason to be protected, and also hints at the later conflict in the film.
The vast amount of boxes and crates at the mill show that the Nationalists are powerful, have budget to spend, and are planning on setting up a permanent base/stronghold at this clearing, as well as the huge amounts of soldiers. The uniform of the captain is intricate, flashy due to its medallions and badges, and how tidy it is, all signalling, along with the watch, that he is an important figure in the film.
The latex gloves hint towards the brutality with which Vidal operates through in the movie, and how he seems to wash his hands of all the violence he commits.
Performance:
The laboured breathing and distressed expression on Ofelia’s face shows that she is scared and injured, and this captures the interest and sympathy of the audience. Her mother comes across as loving and protective of her daughter, but still confused at her obsession with fairy-tales. She is also clearly sick with her sniffling, tired face, exhausted demeanour and sickly coughing. On the other hand, Ofelia seems interested and curious, calm at her mothers coughing. This implies that she is fearless and follows her curiosity, as seen with how she investigates the altar and is ecstatic at the insect. The captain is cold, clearly frustrated with the late arrival of the cars, and commands an air of authority with his silence and in-flinching stare.
The Killing Of A Sacred Deer was released in 2017 and was directed by Yorgos Lanthimos. The film follows a seemingly very happy family. The father Steven, played by Collin Farrell, and mother Anna, Nicole Kidman, have two children who seem to be doing well at school, well-paying jobs, a beautiful home, are respected in their fields and seen as pillars of their community. However, Steven has a dark part of his past as a surgeon sticking to him, Martin (Barry Keoghan) who slowly worms his way into Steven’s social and personal life, and as his intentions become clearer, begins to spark chaos in his perfect, pristine life.
One thing that the film does well is its pacing. The first act of the movie may seem slow and even boring, but it shows that the filmmakers are patient, and building up to important plot points and events by placing subtle hints and foreshadows in the time where not much is really happening. This captures our attention when the pace picks up and peoples true intentions are revealed, and also gives plenty of time to build mystery, suspense, and introduce/establish characters. The time taken, for example, to build and emphasise how truly perfect and seemingly spotless Steven’s life is makes the slow and painful downfall of it more powerful and involving for the audience.
The cinematography of The Killing Of A Sacred Deer is also very notable. The shots are often long and wide, giving the characters plenty of space to move around screen. This creates the atmosphere of the film, which is tense, and often feels like something is missing. The way that the characters talk and interact also conveys this. They seem to have such a happy and perfect life, yet all seem devoid of any emotion or feelings. It is akin to how psychopaths are depicted in other films, like they are using people to suit their own purposes. It makes the people feel fake, unreal and distrust worthy, bringing into question who the real villain is. The obsessive and intrusive martin, or violent and impatient Steven. It is a theme that the film portrays excellently and when the revenge aspect of the plot is revealed, it brings into play themes of morality and justification, which give the film a deep inner-meaning. The close-shots used when people are talking one to one also creates the feeling of claustrophobia, making the audience feel trapped, much like Steven does at points in the film, portraying his descent into madness without words.
The sound design in the film is also very impressive. Often long periods of silence are inserted to keep focus on the dialogue and the subtle meanings and foreshadows included in what is being said. These build up to very shocking and disturbing sounds akin to an engine starting, or motor revving up. It is always used in times of distressing situations, and creates a suddenly tense and powerful scene and atmosphere. It forces the audience to become involved in the film, keeps their attention and does not let them take their eyes away from the screen. It is an interesting technique, as these unnatural sounds in the non-diegetic composed score make us feel uncomfortable to hear, therefore affecting us more. It is also used to break the perfect peace of Steven’s life, symbolising a turning point in events, and portraying just how distressed he is.
The film is also very violent. The fates of the characters is very cruel and sadistic, and, like previously mentioned, makes the audience question where justification for a wrongdoing does not justify the means. It perfectly portrays a young man obsessed with revenge, which seems justified but the film regularly blurs the line between just and unfair, and makes this character seem more and more evil as the film goes on. it also portrays a man obsessed with maintaining a perfect life, who is suddenly confronted by an imperfect part of his past , and his life begins to fall apart, along with his sanity.
Regardless of all of the films subtler meanings, the method with which revenge it taken is extremely fascinating and grim and unique. The development arcs of each character is tragic, Shakespearian almost, and done perfectly. The film also builds suspense very well, with a slow and calm events slowly escalating into stunningly gruesome and powerful scenes, moving the audience by breaking of cinematic boundaries, and eventually builds up to an extremely intense and memorable ending through its shock value and deeper meaning.The killing of a sacred deer is a staple of revenge films, suspense-building, character development and hidden meanings. That’s why I rate it 5 stars!
After filming the movie, I picked out the final clips that I thought were best to use, since we had to re-shoot many shots to experiment with better angles, lines, and to avoid including bloopers. I then inserted them all into LumaFusion. Here, I put them all together in a project and made sure to cut out all the times I could be heard saying “cut”, and also to make sure that all the shots matched up seamlessly, and then spent some time making sure that the audio was decent. This took longer than expected, since I had to edit each individual clip to reduce the sound of each clip, making the overall film quieter but also making sure there were no surprisingly or unnecessarily loud clips left in the final film.
I think that some shots in the film sync up very well, the audio is of a good quality, and I experimented with some interesting shots. The actors did very well, and there were no un-foreseen problems whilst filming. I worked around the small space we had and developed a finished final product.
We did encounter a few issues. At one point an actor looks at the camera, one person’s phone begins ringing the second they enter shot, and the ending may feel slightly drawn-out for too long, and I got some of the clips mixed up due to when I mixed up the order of them on set since I didn’t read the screenplay more closely then. But I am ultimately happy with my finished kitchen sink drink production/project.
What do I need to remember next time? Use the manual focus feature in FilmMcPro to use the focus to make the film look how I want. There should usually be a reason for a camera movement, e.g to reveal something. The camera should be at eye-level. Be playful with the shots and movements. Various techniques show effort and ability as a film-maker in your coursework.
I have finally reached the stage where I can film and edit my kitchen sink drink project. We began by setting up the props in the room, then began to prepare the different shots that the film would start with. I recorded the actors who stuck to the script that I gave them, and sometimes I would add input to make small changes. I considered how easy it would be to edit these clips later on during the filming process, so I made sure to keep the cinematography simple and have some clear way of linking the shots together. A few times we had to re-do certain takes, but the inly real issue arose when i accidentally forgot to film a certain scene, and had to do it after I was supposed to, so the clips were only slightly out of order, which caused a little bit of confusion when I edited the clips together. When editing, I did not add any special effects or audio, and the only problem I seemed to have has was that the audio pitch altered between clips, so I had to manually edit them to fit more cleanly together. Altogether tough, I think that the finished product is quite good.
For this task we had to create a floor plan for out kitchen, though i did one for my living room as well since around half of my film will take place in there, and take pictures of our kitchen in preparation for the filming of our kitchen sink drink project.
Real world: It is 1944 and General Francisco Franco is the fascist ruler of Spain. Captain Vidal and his fascist troops have taken control of a mill in the mountains of Spain. They stockpile food there, giving the civilians barely enough to eat so that they can’t afford to give any supplies to the leftist guerrillas in the woods. Vidal has married Carmen, who bares his child. He sends for her because he wants to be present at the birth of his son. Vidal has little time for Carmen’s young bookish daughter, Ofelia. Unbeknownst to Vidal, his housekeeper (Mercedes) has a brother who leads the rebel maquis. She and Doctor Ferriero secretly supply the guerrillas. The communist rebels retake the mill shortly after Carmen dies during childbirth. As the falangists are overrun, Ofelia kidnaps the newly born child. Vidal follows her into a nearby labyrinth where he shoots the girl and reclaims the baby. He is confronted at the entrance of the labyrinth by Mercedes and a large group of maquis. Pedro (Mercedes’ brother) shoots Vidal under the right eye and kills him. A weeping Mercedes cradles Ofelia. Ofelia dies. Fantasy world: Princess Moanna sneaks out from the underworld to become mortal and dies. Her spirit passes through countless humans. The king of the underworld vows to wait for Moanna’s return. A fairy leads Ofelia to a labyrinth where a faun tells her she is a reincarnation of Princess Moanna and that she needs to return to the underworld. However, to make sure that her magical spirit is still intact, Ofelia has to successfully perform three tasks — obtain a key from the belly of a giant toad (that is killing a tree where enchanted creatures rest); use the key to retrieve an item from a locked door guarded by a demon (the Pale Man); spill the blood of an innocent into the portal of the underworld. The faun instructs her in sorcery. Ofelia is distracted because of her sick mother and fails the second task. Ofelia passes the final test by sacrificing her life instead of her brother’s. Princess Moanna returns to the underworld where she rules with “justice and a kind heart”. There are two sides of the story that take place parallel to each other. Ofelia’s adventure into the underworld kingdom, and Captain Vidal’s pursuit of the rebels in the woods. A realistic scenario tied to a real-life event that actually happened, and a imagined scenario infused with nuanced aspects of traditional fairy tales.
2. When and where do the events in the film take place?
“The period featured, 1944 in Spain, is intriguing as it is clearly a period where the rumblings from the Spanish Civil War are still being felt despite the war itself having finished in 1939.” Captain Vidal has been assigned to the task of hunting down and executing the remaining communists, who are hiding out in the remote woods. The civil war has ended but some groups still fight on, resisting the fascist rule of the nationalists. The majority of the film takes place in the small cabin where Vidal, his family, and troops are stationed.
3. Briefly, what was the Spanish Civil War about? When and how did it start and end?
The war started in 1936 and ended in 1939. It was fought between the fascist Nationalists and the more liberal or communist Republicans. The Republicans were divided and had inferior supplies, whilst the Nationalists were supple by other fascist powers in Europe and had been united under one fascist dictator. Eventually the Republicans lost major cities such as Madrid and Barcelona, and the Nationalists assumed control of Spain.
4. Which of the factions does the captain represent? Why is he stationed at the mill?
Captain Vidal represents the fascist army of the Nationalists who have just taken control of the country. He is stationed at the mill to hunt down and kill the remaining opposition to the dictator and the country’s new government.
5. Which of the factions do the people in the mountains represent? Why are they hiding?
The people hiding in the mountains represent the remaining communist opposition/rebels to the new fascist rulers of Spain. They are hiding since they will be executed if found out to be communist, and so they are armed and preparing an attack on Captain Vidal and his soldiers.
6. Which of the factions do the religious and elite support? Why?
“A local priest, attending a meal held by the Captain, dismisses the possible pain felt by the rebels on theological grounds. His representation lacks humanity and is clearly a barbed commentary on an out of touch and complicit Catholic church: “God has already saved their souls. What happens to their bodies hardly matters to him.” Del Toro uses the cinematic conceit of a banquet to heighten the corruption of the local middle classes and ruling elite. Despite his criticisms of Catholicism as a dogma and institution it is clear that Del Toro admires the spirituality of his native religion — in a later film Crimson Peak, a ghost story, he commented on his belief in ghosts. The scene above is strongly redolent of a stylised heaven with its church-like setting, a rosary window flooded with golden light and a grey bearded father figure flanked by a doe-eyed mother. It is all rather stuffy and formal befitting a royal court perhaps but not a fairy domain. That said it is clearly Ofelia’s (Princess Moanna’s) ‘happy place’ — she has come home to a loving warm family and an adoring people.” The priest represents the Spanish Catholic Church, which sided with the Fascist dictatorship that had won the civil war. So did the elite classes of Spain, which are represented by the wealthy landowners that visit Vidal for dinner. These factions supported Vidal in the film and the Nationalists in real-life most likely since they had won the war, and had to win the trust of the new and violent government. The Nationalists also did not influence or negatively affect these factions, unlike the civilian population in the film which goes hungry so that Vidal can kill the remaining rebels. He does not take away any food from the church or the elite’s.
7. Which of the factions do the peasants support? Why?
The peasants support the communist rebels hiding out in the woods. This is because the rebels are trying to get rid of Captain Vidal and his troops, who are seen taking away the peasants food and even brutally murdering a group of innocent civilians in the movie. The Nationalists are brutal and indifferent to the peasants, and harm them in their attempts at removing the remaining communists.
8. What role do women play in the two factions?
“The representation of women is evidence of the social problems women faced in this patriarchal and macho era.” Mercedes is the woman who serves both sides of the conflict. She aids Captain Vidal and his troops by working in the kitchen, like the other women, and tending to Ofelia when her mother is ill. She help’s her brother and his communist allies by secretly bringing them food, messages, and supplies. Never does a woman get involved in any physical combat, but more espionage activities, which is accurate to ideals on gender roles that were held at the time.
9. How is food an important symbol in the film?
Food can be seen as a metaphor for the deprivation and suppression that people were subject to during the war. This can be seen in how the peasants have their food taken away from them, Captain Vidal and his guests hold big, expensive seeming meals regularly, and Ofelia steals food from the ogre because she is so hungry. It can also show how corrupt someone is. The rebels in the woods are represented as a good force, fighting against the dictatorship poof the Nationalists. Meanwhile, Vidal and similarly the ogre are seen with long tables of delicious foods, and both of those characters are villainous and corrupt. It also shows Ofelia’s childish wonder at all of the fairy-tale scenarios that she is living through, and this is even when she steals the grape from the ogre despite being seriously warned not too. It shows that she is naive and susceptible to temptation.
10. How is poverty an important theme in the film?
Poverty is used similarly to food as a symbol of corruption and evil in people. The people living in the woods, along with the peasants are seen as poor and heroic people who are repressed by the government but still fight on for the sake of their cause. On the other hand, Vidal lives in a luxurious and romantic mill, with access to milk and bread and meat, and he is the main source of evil and the cause of most of the problems in the film. It also show’s how people suffered throughout the war, whilst the upper-classes thrived unfairly. Del Toro also paid tribute to the tragedy of the civil war in his 2001 masterpiece The Devils Backbone.
11. How is time an important theme in the film?
The film begins with a shot of Ofelia dying in the Labyrinth, and ends at the same point. This circular narrative is perhaps meant to represent the pain and constant struggle of civilians living through the civil war. It is also perhaps done to show that Ofelia’s story is infinite, as apparently thousands of others girls like her have attempted to pass the faun’s tests, but have failed. This continuous cycle of death and reincarnation, since the story begins with her first body dying, and ends with her last dying, is done to show the fairy-tale likeness of her adventure, and the brutality of the Spanish Civil War.
12. How is disobedience an important theme in the film?
Disobedience is a more underlying theme in the film, used to convey a message about the war and gullibility. Ofelia is obedient to the faun at first, completing his quests and doing as he sits. This puts her in dangerous situations, such as the pale-man sequence. When she finally disobeys it at the end of the film and refuses to draw the blood of her innocent brother, does she make it into the underworld where she is re-united with her family. A similar thing happens in the real-world between Captain Vidal and the doctor who helps his pregnant wife through child-birth and also secretly supplies the rebels in the woods. When Vidal realises that the doctor is betraying him, he asks why he didn’t obey him. The doctor insults the captain by saying that only people like him can obey without thinking. Vidal then kills him but his death was in servitude to the rebel cause. His death was heroic and was done to show that the doctor would rather die serving the cause he believes in rather than the evil Vidal, so only when he openly disobeys and defies the captain does he realise how to help the rebels win. It shows that blind obedience brings death and suffering, and freedom, the opposite of what the fascists believe in, is how to win over evil.
13. How and in what ways does pans Labyrinth draw on classic fairy tale and fantasy tropes and archetypes?
The movie portrays many fascinating and various monsters. The giant frog is comical and quite confusing to behold, the pale man is like an ogre, terrifying and repulsive, and the faun is mysterious and mystical. These creatures are all similar to monsters from classic fairy tales, such as ogres, giant animals, witches and myths. The faun is even a representation of the Greek God Pan, hence the name of the film. The settings, such as the rotting tree, big dining hall and labyrinth even seem like they are plucked from fantasy stories. The young and naive Ofelia is filled with child-like wonder at the events that unfold before her, and even eats the food from the ogre, despite being frequently warned not too. This is similar to how many fairy tale protagonist would actually, and her motivation to become a princess in an underworld paradise is similar to old and classical fairy tale character motivations. The ogre scene is even similar to the story of Hansel and Gretel, with the repulsive witch who lures in her child prey with enticing and luxurious food.
14. How is fascism portrayed in the film?
“The negative depiction of Franco’s fascist forces is clearly intended to be extended to the imaginative poverty of fascism in general — in contrast to the more benign and sensitive (although hardly democratic) fairy kingdom. A more realist political representation is that of the guerrillas who are presented as resourceful and determined and egalitarian. Mercedes’ love of children (Ofelia and her baby brother) suggests a tenderness and a celebration of all things childish — indeed, unlike Ofelia’s weak and dismissive mother, Mercedes gives advice on the handling of fauns.” We see the contrasts between the resourceful rebels and Captain Vidal in his dining scenes, where much enticing food is laid out before him on the table. These subtle details hint at how the fascists are unfair and treat their people wrongly. This is also done more obviously with how the fascist troops brutally murder civilians and effect the people around them, keeping all the food for themselves, torturing captured rebels, and neglecting the need of the peasants in the area.
15. How does Guillermo Del Toro employ uterine and sapphic imagery in the film?
The image/shapes of the uterus is referenced/portrayed in the film Guiana the rotting tree in the woods. The way that this tree is apparently rotting due to the toad inside is perhaps meant to reference how Ofelia’s mother is going to die in child-birth. It can also be said to represent how the Faun has secret and mysterious motives for Ofelia’s quests, or how when she crawls out of the uterus, it is almost like being re-born by it, like how she becomes the princess in the underground kingdom at the end of the film. Yonis imagery is seen in the opening of the tree, once again referencing the theme of re-birth and childhood, which of course begins with birth.
16. How are maternal instincts portrayed in the film?
We see Mercedes’ paternal instinct to protect Ofelia when her mother is not well enough to do so throughout the film, for example when she cradles Ofelia’s dying body and sings her a lullaby. It is also seen in Ofelia’s mother herself, when she is concerned at the loss of her daughter. Captain Vidal is portrayed as cruel and indifferent to his daughters existence, so his lack of paternal instinct shows that he is a villain. Even the doctor looks after Ofelia and comforts her. It is the more evil characters like the Faun and Vidal who do not care for Ofelia, or have seemingly malicious intent for her.
17. What was the significance of faces and shaving in the film?
We see Captain Vidal shaving a few times in the film. Each time we see a cruel and cold look on his face, which shows that even in private, he never betrays his image of a hardened captain by showing guilt or remorse, which signals that he is a truly evil and un-caring villain. The actual action of shaving itself is perhaps meant to represent how Vidal is obsessed with upholding his image, or how he regularly washes and leans himself of the violence that he has committed. Vidal is later on shoe in the face, and his face is cut open by Mercedes, and a civilian has his face bashed in by Vidal. This is either done to show that Vidal’s previous acts of violence have come back to make him suffer through h=what he made other people suffer through, or to show how no matter how many times he shaves of his guilt and criminality, he will eventually break and fall to the violence that he has left in his wake.
18. What is the significance of flowers in the film?
Flowers often represent the theme of re-birth, blooming and youth. This is seen at the end of the film when a flower sprouts from the tree that Ofelia visited. It shows that traces of her still exist in the real world, and this links back to the fairy-tale aspect of the story. It also shows that she still holds her childish wonder and joy fullness that she had whilst she was alive.
19. How does Guillermo Del Toro operate a ‘one for them, one for me’ filmmaking policy?
Del Toro often reveals a pice of information in the film through scenes like Mercedes taking hidden supplies out of a hidden floorboard, or how the captain finds penicillin in a similar bottle at the rebel camp to what the doctor supplies them. This particular scene signals to the audience, despite a lack of dialogue in it, that Vidal has realised that the doctor is a traitor,and that he is about to kill him. However, Toro also keeps many things hidden from the audience, like the fauns secret motives, or if Ofelia is seeing all of these monsters in her head or if they are real. This is seen when Vidal looks at Ofelia but does not see the Faun, despite Del Toro tricking us into thinking that it was real. This is done by keeping Ofelia’s adventure and Vidal’s campaign separate until the end of the film.
20. How far is Pans Labyrinth representative of Guillermo Del Toro’s oeuvre?
“Del Toro as an effective and idiosyncratic fantasy/horror auteur is evidenced in his earlier films such as Cronos (1993), The Devil’s Backbone (2001) and Crimson Peak (2015) as well as in his much more mainstream Hollywood work such as Hellboy (2004) and Pacific Rim (2013).” However, despite the conception that The Devils Backbone was Del Toro’s magnum opus, Pans Labyrinth showed that the director was capable of creating a deep, though-out and fully realised work of art. The concepts and story of the film is unique, with memorable characters and scenes that cement is as a powerful and individual piece of filmmaking that cannot be compared to any other of Toro’s films, or any other film in general. It is what the director is know for. He and the film are completely attached to one another.
21. How did the critical reception of The Devils Backbone influence the production of Pan’s Labyrinth?
After the massive positive receivable of The Devils Backbone, Del Toro was left with the necessary budget for creating Pans Labyrinth. This helped lead to a high production cost, and making the movie feel like it was backed by a large studio, despite Del Toro being in control of the project. The quality of the production led to more people watching the film, and the amount of money to invest in production, sets, costumes and actors was enough.
22. Was the film financially successful?
“Released in the UK by Optimum. Premiered at Cannes in May 2006 to great acclaim. Co–produced by a number of Spanish, Mexican and American production companies the $19 million budget is reflected in the complex production design, period dressing and relatively large cast. The eventual worldwide box office of $83.3 million was seen as a triumph.” The film nowadays is viewed as a classic, and the magnum opus of an already well known and respected auteur director.
23. Why is the year of the release of The Devils Backbone and PansLabyrinth significant?
Pans Labyrinth was released in 2006, just 5 years after The Devils Backbone. Nowadays Guillermo Del Toros films are made at similar intervals, and this is likely because it is these two films that made his name as an iconic director. The Devils Backbone’s success allowed for the production value of Pans Labyrinth, which is part of why the film is so good. It’s impressive practical effects and beautiful location, for example.
24. Why physical effects over CGI?
“The key technology used in this film is the animatronics and green screen work as discussed above and its effective creation of a magical-realist production design.” The practical costumes and real sets create the feeling that these fairy-tale like settings are real, and that makes the terrifying monsters all the more real and disturbing. CGI is only ever used for the more graphic gore in the film, such Vidal being shot in the face or the farmer’s son having his face bashed in by Vidal. This is because that’s harder to make with physical effects, but when Toro could use physical effects he did, and it makes the whole film feel more real, grounded, and serious.
25. Why did Guillermo Del Toro write the DVD subtitles himself?
“Del Toro wrote the subtitles for Pan’s Labyrinth himself after becoming disillusioned with the translation of The Devil’s Backbone — a film also with the Spanish Civil War as its backdrop and the informal prequel to Pan’s Labyrinth.” Del Toro clearly takes his films very seriously and puts a lot of thought and effort into them. TheDevils Backbone and Pans Labyrinth are the clearest examples of this. So it would make sense for him to make sure the message was conveyed correctly.
26. How does Guillermo Del Toro use distinct colour palettes in the film?
Different colour palettes are used in night-time scenes, day time scenes, and scenes in the underworld, or mythical/magical places in the film. The one used for the day is light and vibrant, bringing out the beautiful colours of the forest, and also perhaps meant to show how Ofelia feels safe at this time, and her wonder and curiosity in this new place. A darker, gloomier palette is used at night, increasing the shadows in the scenes, adding to the feeling of mystery and danger in these moments. The one used in the other world is less easy to notice. It is subtle, probably done to intentionally to signify , to those looking closely enough, a change in the atmosphere, and show that this place is not normal, safe, or human-made even.
27. Look at the “context starter questions” on the Contexts Of Film mind-map. How many could you answer? Add your answers to the end of this post.
I answered one question for each film context.
Institutional: What studio produced the film and how has this changed the films content?
Pans Labyrinth was produced by the Telecinco Cinema studio. This studio is Spanish, which is possibly why the film had such a high production value, since they wanted to fund a project that displayed some of the country’s history and culture. It would also be supporting a Mexican director producer an independent passion project, so they were perhaps more inclined to help fund the film.
Political: Does the film engage with politics directly or is it in the subtext?
The politics of Pans Labyrinth is strictly kept in the subtext of the script. There is never any clear political message, though the villains, who are fascist nationalists, are shown as the obvious villains, whilst the communist rebels are depicted as strong-willed and justified heroes. So the film has political sidings, but no clear message, meaning or manifesto.
Social: Is the film challenging or reinforcing hegemonic attitudes to particular social groups or concepts?
Pans Labyrinth seems to be challenging hegemonic attitudes to the concept of socialism and the group of socialists in the woods. This is seen in how it portrays Captain Vidal and his fascist comrades as the clear villains of the film. This is because they are the hegemonic class in Spain when the film is set, and the socialists are rebels hiding out in the woods, and they are portrayed as the protagonists of the story.
Cultural: Is the film typical of films from its country of origin at the time?
Probably not. Guillermo Del Toro is known for making extremely unique and powerful story’s that can’t really be compared to the work of other directors. His films are completely the brainchild of his mind, as he is a very original and individual auteur who does not use troops or trends in his films, as is seen in the time period that Pans Labyrinth is set in, and its very strange yet beautiful story.
Historical: We’re the filmmakers restricted by and contextual factors?
Most likely not. The issue of the Spanish civil war is not off-limits for filmmakers to include in their film, and this being a personal project completely controlled/produced by Del Toro, and not influenced by studio interference, there were no limitations in the creation of Pans Labyrinth.
Technological: (There is no question for technological factors so I made one up) How are the technological aspects of Pans Labyrinth reflected in the film?
The film has a very high production value. This is clear in its good-looking CGI, impressive and intricate practical effects, large cast, beautiful location and ambitious story that would seem very hard to adapt from script into film.
Pans Labyrinth was made in 2006 by director Guillermo Del Toro, and follows the story of Ofelia (Ivan’s Baquero) who moves, with her mother, to a remote area in the Spanish woods to meet her father, the brutal fascist Captain Vidal (Sergei Lopez). Whilst there, she begins to discover there is a labyrinth in the woods, and is involved in more and more dangerous tasks by a mysterious faun humanoid, who claims that she is the princess of a powerful, hidden kingdom.
Del Toro uses different filters throughout the film. It is never specified when the filter changes, but I think that there was one used for the daytime, one for nighttime, and one for the other world in the film. These filters are all very different, for example the one used during the day is bright, rosy and brings out the natural beauty of the woods. Meanwhile the one used at night is dull and gloomy, and increases the darkness of the shadows to add to the mystery and supernatural element of the movie.
Pans Labyrinth holds a special place in film history since it is most likely Guillermo Del Toro’s most famous film. The unique and disgusting monsters are instantly recognisable, and the magical yet horrific aspects of the plot make the story interesting ands captivating.
I personally really admired the film! The terrifying and fascinating mythology that Del Toro invented for the movie is constantly keeping the audience interested, and leads to some extremely memorable sequences, such as the “pale man” sequence. The movie is also extremely suspenseful. The characters are all memorable for their arc’s, and usually violent deaths. The gore factor in the film is a perfect example of how Toro pictures how brutal real-life scenarios would be affected by the more supernatural and fairy-tale scenarios. This same scenario is explored in Guillermo’s other film The Devils Backbone (Guillermo Del Toro, 2001) which imagines how a ghost/haunting would effect people taking refuge during the Spanish Civil War. Pans Labyrinth explores how Fascist and guerrilla soldiers would be affected by the magical and often terrifying creatures that exist in the woods.
One thing that I liked about the film was how the soldiers of either side of the war are never actually influenced by the monsters. The combat taking place between Vidal and the rebels in the woods runs as a parallel story to Ofelia’s adventure with the faun and the labyrinth. The movie will often cut to the war crimes that Vidal is committing, to the repulsive monsters that live in the labyrinth. This shows how humans can be monsters too, but Vidal’s evil is slowly revealed to be more than initially suspected throughout the film, whilst the monsters are instantly disgusting and obviously evil. This comparison, the excellent performance from Sergei Lopez and the complex inner-thought and violence committed by him all make a compelling villain out of Captain Vidal.
Del Toro’s creatures are unique but instantly repulsive, and often very memorable, including all the ones in Pans Labyrinth.
The film is also surprisingly emotional. The struggle and hardships that the rebel’s must go through, and the hidden motivations of Captain Vidal all make up a shockingly human aspect of a film that on the surface is about hideous monsters and faeries. The ending is emotional, and the brutality of the relatable and sympathetic characters’ deaths makes it all the more crushing and impactful to watch.
That is why I respect and admire the undoubtedly masterful filmmaking of Pans Labyrinth. The characters are very realistic and likeable , the violence perpetuates the gruesome and dark undertone of the film, and the way that the real scenario of the aftermath of the Spanish Civil War and a magical but dangerous underworld collide make a fascinating and compelling film. So I rate Pans Labyrinth 4 and a half stars!
The title of the film is ‘split second”. The film begins when a person peeks into a kitchen and asks the person stood at the sink for a coke. The character at the sink looks up and agrees to, to which the other character leaves after saying “thanks”. The person at the sink then walks over to the fridge and pulls out a can of coke, then back to the sink where they pour it into a glass. They then visibly consider their next move, before opening a can of Pepsi and pouring it into the glass also.
They then bring it to the other character, who is sat in the living room on their phone. They take the glass and sip it, but makes no complaint. The person who made and spiked the drink asks if it tastes alright, to which the person drinking it said “yep, its fine”. The person who made the drink then sighs in apparent disappointment and looks out the window. The camera rests on a shot of the front garden from the window in the living room for a few moments, letting the silence and calm there settle in. Then the camera cuts back to a close-up on the drink-spiders eyes, showing that they are in deep thought. The film then ends.
We, for our next task, need to plan and prepare to create a short film in which someone’s drink is spiked , taking place in a kitchen sink, of course.
The treatment of a film is a rough outline of the plot, characters and course of a film, made before actual the script. It is told sort of like a narrative and highlights the most important information about the film, such as the title.
The Devil’s Backbone was made in 2001 by director Guillermo Del Toro. The film follows a young boy, Carlito (Fernando Tielve) who has been brought to an asylum for children during the Spanish Civil War. However, whilst there, he begins to notice strange occurrences, and eventually comes to the realisitation that the place is haunted.
You can tell that the film is made by Del Toro due to certain events and aspects of the film that are similar to things that happen in his other ones. For example, the film revolves around an old and abandoned building where its inhabitants learn from visions of spirits that some characters are hiding secrets from their past. The plot of Crimson Peak (Guillermo Del Toro, 2015) can be described in the same way.
The film begins a flashback, intriguing the audience and establishing the mystery element of the film.The first act follows Carlito being brought to the asylum, and the rest of the first act follows how he interacts with the other children there, how he discovers the ghost, and subtle hints are made to foreshadow events that occur later on in the film. The second act is the consequences of the ghosts existence, and the buildup of tension between the adults. These tensions amount in the final act, and that’s also when all of the previous foreshadowing/hints come into play.
The film holds a special place in Guillermo Del Toro’s career as a director. Before this film he had directed one film by a studio, which was not received well by audiences. So, Toro invested into his own project, The Devil’s Backbone, which established him as a clever, unique, and talented director, who in modern day is an instantly recognisable “Titan of terror” in the horror genre.
The ghost in the cellar. Unlike most horror films, the ghost in The Devils Backbone serves as a plot device to progress the story, not just create cheap scares.
I personally really liked the film. Whilst I was not overly impressed with the slow first act, I was completely engaged to the story thorough out the rest of the film, when tensions amount and events start to occur. The film is cemented as a violent, grim, mystery that is made unique by its fantasy and horror elements.
For this area in the course we will be looking at the films Pan’s labyrinth (Guillermo Del Toro, 2006) and Wild Tales (Damien Szifron, 2014). These films have been chosen since one was made in Europe,, and the other was made outside of Europe. Our assessment objectives are to demonstrate an understanding of elements of film, and to apply knowledge and understanding of elects of film to analyse films.
We must write about both of these films but we do not have to make any comparisons. We will spend 30 minutes writing about each film. We will be focusing on key sequences in these films, and write relevant paragraphs about the key elements of film form in said sequences. We need to use technical terminology correctly and as much as possible, and make frequent reference to the director and their intention/ affect of film on the audience.
We will spend 60 minutes on four different areas of the films, key elements, contexts, aesthetics and representation. We will also do a 40 mark question for each film, and we get to choose the one we do as well. We discuss visual style or representation for each film.
The core study areas that will be assessed are key elements, contexts and aesthetics and representation. There are no additional study areas for component 2a.
A re-occurring presence in the film is the fascist military, which we understand are called the ZZ. These people are brought into the film only ever to pose a problem or great to the protagonists.
An example of this is when M. Gustav (Ralph Fiennes) is arrested by Henckel’s (Edward Norton) and his men. This paints the military as a negative, oppressive force. Even though we, the audience, do not know who they work for or why they do what they do, we understand that they are antagonists from the actions they take, their evident racism towards Zero ( Tony Revolori) and their oppressive methods.
Edward Norton as Henckel’s. Notice the uniform and formation of men behind him.
Their grey and straight uniforms are also very dull and grim, almost similar to that of a Nazi uniform. The audience knows what a Nazi uniform looks like, so the obvious resemblance through the badges, coats and hats leads us to associate them with Nazi’s.
The way that Henkels men go about their orders immediately also shows how strict and authoritarian they are. It also establishes Henckel’s position as a high ranking officer. As I mentioned earlier, the badges subtly reference those worn by Nazi officers to display rank. the way that those in the film are star-shaped and arranged symmetrically in the uniform stop them from being direct Nazi uniforms, but subtly bring the image to a viewers mind.
Ed Nortons performance also paints the image of an evil man. He is stern and I’m-polite, and even when he apologises in the first scene he’s in, he seems to have no emotion or care on his face.
Another notable point is the way that the soldiers are tightly arranged in formations in all scenes shows how strict and tight they are. The banners shown in the hotel lobby after it has been taken over by the military also strongly hints back to Nazi propaganda.
The wold emblem shown later on in the film also brings the image of Nazi uniformity into the viewers head, instantly establishing the character as evil, before they even do anything. The way that they take over the hotel later on and completely re-decorate it also shows how evil the military is, and once again subtly references Nazi takeovers of places in WW2.
Wes Andersons style of directing is easily recognisable for its distinct and unique frame symmetry, aspect ratios, and perfectly arranged scenery.
A very noticeable thing about The Grand Budapest Hotel is the colour ratio. The colours are very bright and distinct, creating the feeling of a rich and bright environment. This makes certain scenes more memorable because of their stunning and gorgeous visuals. It is also used in one scene to convey to the audience that the scene is a grim and bleak time in Zero’s (Tony Revolori) life. This is done by making the scene completely black and white.
Another thing that the film is known for is the way that Anderson switches aspect ratios between the four different time periods. The ratio shrinks as the film goes back in time, starting at 16:9 in the opening scene, set in modern day, and transitioning to 4:3 in the 1930’s. This gives each scene its own distinct feel and aesthetic, and also brings the audience into the feeling of films made around that time period.
The film also uses zeitgeist to create the feeling of Eastern-European culture in the 1930’s through the clothes that people wear, the furniture and architecture, and and even the re-occurring trend of moustaches.
Almost every shot is also perfectly framed/centred. This involves placing characters and buildings and items centre frame. It also leads to shots being more symmetrical, which an equal amount of characters on each side of the frame, and buildings being perfectly balanced and symmetrical too. This creates the feeling of the time period the film is set in in a particular scene, and it also makes the colour scheme more balanced and aesthetically pleasing, like the rest of the film.
The editing is slow and avoids shots as much as possible, the mise-en-scene is arranged perfectly to create the feel of the place and time-period, the cinematography is done to place things perfectly centre-frame to show the importance of certain things and to make the shots more pleasing and symmetrical for the audience to look at.
Ralph Fiennes plays the hotel’s concierge, M. Gustav. The character of Gustav is very strict and competent, and is a figure of authority and self-control.
The pace and tone of Fiennes’ dialogue is very quick and calm. He gives out constant orders with a strict and confident tone, which signals to the audience his position above the other hotel staff. He also speaks very quickly and does not stumble on his words, which shows that he is a competent and capable manager.
His voice is quiet and calm, but also has a tone of authority and power. He also never said please, to show that he is an effective manger who does not waste his words.
Madame .D played by Hilda Swindon. M. Gustave’s nervous guest.
Gustave’s mannerisms are also very precise and confident. He moves around the room very quickly and calmly, with the non-verbal expression of someone who know what they are doing and knows that they will have their orders seen to. He moves his arms to give instructions very fluidly, almost like a bale dancer. This and the way that he moves so confidently show that he has planned and precisely timed movements to match that of the camera.
The blocking is also done to keep Gustav precisely centre-frame constantly throughout the one-take, which shows the audience that he is the centre of authority, and an important character. When we first see him, he seems to be reflecting as he looks from his balcony. This paints him as a reflective and wise person.
Ralph Fiennes’s (Right) movement and tone reflex tone the image of a confident and assured person.
His posture is poised and upright, to show that he is strict and keeps himself in order. His movements are purposeful, since he knows what his job is. It shows that he is experienced and has probably done this same thing before.
He leans into the conversation to show feigned interest, and when the conversation doesn’t go his way he show his frustration, before regaining control and continuing his calm demeanour and confident tone. But this breaks when he sees the varnish he doesn’t like, and then the prediction of his movements and confident tone stop briefly. he also interrupts his guest to make sure that she is calm and does not protest to leaving.
Blade Runner 2049 was released in 2017 and directed by Denis Villeneuve. It is the sequel to the 1982 classic made by Ridley Scott. The film is a sci-fi thriller that takes place in the not so distant future of Earth, where clones of humans, named replicants, are forced to work so that the rest of humanity can thrive. Our protagonist is K (Ryan Gosling), a replicant blade runner, who’s job it is to hunt down escaped replicants. But on his latest job, he has made a discovery that brings into question the morality of his job, and may decide the future of humanity.
One of the greatest shots in cinematic history!
The movie cannot be talked about without spending a good portion of the analysis on the movies visuals. Blade runner 2049 is one of the most stunning and visually striking movie’s that you will lay eyes on. The scope of the dystopian landscapes is massive, and the extreme wide shots are done perfectly to emphasise how absolutely huge the buildings are. The massive, cramped buildings, and old decaying statues all create the atmosphere of a future and alien world. This is easily one of the most aesthetically stunning films I’ve ever seen, and one of the most breathtakingly beautiful too. Every shot keeps the viewers eyes glued to the screen. I’d say this is thanks to the excellent cinematography, fascinating imagination of Denis, and amazing mise-en-scene.
The sets are completely fleshed out to invent an entirely different feel and air to each place. The massive, overpopulated cities feel dirty, cramped and dangerous. This is due to the strange and dirty clothing, and the soundtrack in these scenes is often loud and filled with surprising sounds. On the other hand, when we are in the large, replicant-producing company buildings, the lighting is much darker, and this makes it feel more clean, but also more sinister and even subtly evil.
The architecture is also mind blowing. The buildings are huge, and they all even seem like massive monsters that reach the cloud line. They perfectly accompany the dark and gloomy climate that is often present in the film, and they even come across as intimidating at times. When inside these buildings it is much the same, with giant halls that make people seem tiny and insignificant, or the enormous abandoned spaces, or dark and silent library we see in one scene. It all contributes to the movie having a grand and stunning scope, one that leaves an extremely profound impact on the audience.
A good example of how baffling yet stunning the scenery is in Blade Runner 2049.
The film does not just excel in the visual department though. The story of Blade Runner 2049 is also extremely engaging and emotional. The environment and world which the story is set in is quite miserable, but the story has a much more somber and powerful meaning. It is about a hero who does not matter in the end, and the small glimpses that we see of his inner thoughts lead us, the audience, to ponder on what he is. Human or replicant? The concept of replicants is also explored brilliantly here. We really see how cruelly they are treated by humans, and how dystopian a world is when these living, thinking beings, synthetic or not, are made to massacre each other. We also see the production of replicants in one scene, which exposes how brutal and disgusting it is. The process is similar to a birth, but the product is an adult human, which makes the sight extremely repulsive yet fascinating.
The main character, K, is also a very interesting person. We see, throughout the film, a synthetic being come to the realisation that he may be more human than he thought. This brings some philosophical questions into play, like “does this mean he’s been living his life a slave despite being a person”, or “is he the next step in human evolution?” It also puts him into an extremely dangerous situation, and flips everything that the viewer knew before on its head. It is an interesting plot twist, but is no where near as powerful and brutal as the one at the end. All of this is without mentioning how incredible Ryan Gosling’s performance is as k. He is extremely calm and reserved, since he is a replicant, but when his emotions show it is completely compelling and powerful, since they feel real and genuine, making him an extremely sympathetic character to watch.
Another thing that I like so much about this film is how well it executes the neo-noir genre. Neo-noir is a modern revival of film noir. Blade Runner 2049 does it so well by following the classic noir format of a detective with a pessimistic view on life living in a grim world as he puts together the pieces of a puzzle. This film also flips the genre on its head though, by putting it in a completely sci-fi setting. One that is unlike any other put to screen as well.
The soundtrack to the film is also remarkable. Composed by Hans Zimmer, the score perfectly matches and accompanys the settings of the film, but also adds to them. The score is powerful in emotional moments, and stunning when the scene is of a large and grand environment. It not only accompanies the film, but makes up an essential part of it, like any good score should.
I also stated in the title of this blog post that Blade Runner 2049 was and is the greatest sequel of all time. I say this because the film does not just piggyback off its predecessor, but adapts and adds to the lore and world that the story is set in. It has essential characters from the first film, and the plot in this one is a direct consequence of the one in the first, making it an actual sequel. But, at the same time, the movie has a new plot, and does not waste time on making shallow references to the first film, letting it use its time effectively. The film also has just as much, though probably more depth and power as the first Blade runner movie, with the same philosophical themes and dark outlook on the future, but new characters and lore to use to make a great film.
Because of its grim and dark atmosphere, absolutely incredible cinematography, memorable soundtrack, outstanding performances, beautiful scenery, powerful aesthetic and unforgettable moments/story that will leave an emotional impact on the audience, I think that Blade Runner 2049 is a perfect film, and on of the few sequels that is actually better than its predecessor . It is also my personal favourite film!
The staff of the hotel have noticeably tidy uniforms. M. Gustav in particular has a very slick sand clean look to him, with his neat hair, straight uniform and confident air about him. The colour of his outfit is purple, along with the rest of the staff, which is a rich and deep colour, associated with the wealth and royalty of the hotels guests. The colour of the carpet is also a very deep and rich red, possibly there to contribute to the atmosphere of wealth, tidiness, and nobility.
The tidiness of the staffs uniforms is contrasted by the crippled shoe shiner outside the hotel, who looks dirty and un-organised. The man who’s shoes he is cleaning is also very well dressed, and not even looking at the boy. This subtly shows how highly regarded and treated the hotels guests are, and the respect with which the staff treat them.
The hotels golden and perfectly arranged front entrance, with staff ready to greet guests.
The guests are also established as extremely wealthy customers. the men are in clean and even perfect suits, the women are in fur coats and hats, showing that they have money and also creating an atmosphere similar to that of the time period and place that the film is set in.
The way that M. Gustav speaks to the guests also shows how highly they are treated, especially in contrast to how he quickly and sternly gives orders to the staff. he even talks to the chef like he would a dog, or misbehaving child, just after carefully and respectfully conversing with a guest who is leaving. The amount of guests and luggage outside also quietly signals to the audience how popular and successful the hotel is.
The Grand Budapests lobby, the carpet a deep red, walls golden marble, staff uniform tidy and purple, and expensive furniture perfectly arranged.
The way that the staff, such and Zero, instantly do as Gustav has ordered shows how loyal they are. It also shows the authority and status of Gustav, how strict, tight and efficient the hotels standards are too, creating the sense of a truly fine and quality establishment.
The actual contents and structure of the hotel is also a big factor of the scenes mise-en-scene. The lobby is grand and beautiful. the walls are marble and shiny, lightbulbs arranged in splendid patterns. There are exotic plants, clearly imported, and large flower bouquets to symbolise how expensive this environment is to build and to stay in. The carpet is almost like that of something royalty or celebrity’s would walk on, and even the front doors sign is golden, showing wealth from the first steps up to the lobby door.
Chapters 28 to 29 in the film show Dmitri (Adrian Brody) chasing Agatha (Saoirse Ronan) since she has the painting Boy With Apple.
The sequence begins with an establishing shot, which establishes the location and time of the coming scene by showing an extreme wide-shot of the Grand Budapest hotel at night. This shot then cuts to multiple fast-paced and snappy shots of things like keys and shakers with the fascist army’s symbol on, showing to the audience that they are now in control of the hotel.
These shots occur in sequence, making it continuity editing. Here it shows Agatha walking up to a desk and handing over a cake. We, the audience, know from editing in other films, that when the camera cuts to the hotels new concierge, that this takes place at the same time of Agatha approaching the front desk. This is parallel editing, when two sequences that are continually edited are played next to each other, and take place in the film at the same time.
A good example of a Wes Anderson symmetrical wide-shot. This one is done to show what has changed in the hotel since we, the audience, last saw it.
There is then an example of glance-object editing when Agatha looks at something, and then we see a close-up of that thing she was looking at. There is also another instance where parallel editing is used when we see M. Gustav (Ralph Fiennes) and Zero (Tony Revolori) outside in a delivery van. We know that this takes place at the same time as Agatha receiving the painting from the vault.
The sequence then enters back into straight continuity editing when Agatha is noticed by Dmitri, who begins o chase her. When he sees here, however, a quick mugshot is inserted for the audience to understand how Dmitri recognises her. the ensuing chase scene is quite an unconventional one, since there are very few cuts, leading to long takes, as is the style of Wes Andersons directing.
Zero (left) and Agatha (right) after falling into the delivery van together.this is after the parallel editing of their individual paths cross, making it become continuity editing.
The parallel editing ends when Agatha and Dmitri enter the same elevator, so the previous shots of them separately have joined together. In this elevator we see Agatha is visibly afraid, and then the camera cuts to Dmitri to show the audience what she is afraid of.
There is then a classic shot-reverse-shot to show that Dmitri and Gustav are making direct eye contact as they shout across the room at each other. just before the gunfight begins, we see multiple soldiers poking their heads out of their individual rooms. The way that it goes from one man to another on the opposite side of the room creates a satisfying rhythm to the moment. When Zero looks off the balcony, a shot-reverse-shot is done to show that he is looking down at her. There is then an instance of cross-cutting when the scene cuts from Zero to Agatha, and then the scene enters continuity editing when he joins her on the balcony. The scene ends with a birds-eye shot of Zero and Agatha looking up at the camera, and then a close-up of the second copy of the second will to show what it is that they were looking at.
The sound mix in the chapters 25 to 26 is carefully made to build tension towards the reveal and chase scene at the end of the sequence. The snow is diegetic sound, probably added into post-filming, since the remote foothills are clearly on a green screen. This creates an atmosphere in the scene, making it feel more realistic. The sound of the cable cars swinging on their cables is also diegetic, and clearly made to sync up with the music score, probably done to build the impact and suspense made by the music.
Speaking of the sound mix, the music has a similarity to that of the place and time period of Eastern Europe in the twentieth century, including multiple string instruments, which are also effective of building tension and creating a feeling of impending doom.
A wide shot of the observatory on the mountain top.
The sound mix is also filled with sharp and jarring sounds, such as a motorbike starting, or a whistle being blown. These are quite surprising and shocking, putting the audience on edge. They also contribute to the building of intensity.
I also noticed that the music abruptly cuts off when characters speak. Then it begins again as soon as the characters finish interactions. The score also rises in tempo and pace the closer Zero and Gustav get to the church. Once again the dialogue between two characters is made clear when Gustav is instructed where to go after sitting down in the church, and the singing from the priests stops at this precise moment.
The audience is shown that a body has been dropped despite the scene being completely black, by the diegetic sound of a slumping noise. Of course, when the scene is lit again, we see that someone has been made red.
The sequence in which M. Gustave and his fellow inmates escape from checkpoint-19 (chapter 21) is made so that the information that needs to be shown to the audience is shown to them, and then the direct/immediate consequences of said thing are shown. This is apparent when the camera pans from the site of a lone van, silently implying to the audience that it is there to be used as an escape vehicle, a shot of Zero clocking into a manhole, showing that the escape is already underway.
One recognisable feature of Wes Andersons direction in his films is perfectly symmetrical shots. These break the rule-of-thirds, and make the image perfect and almost like a painting. It is done in this sequence to bring the a button perfectly into centre frame, where the audiences attention will be undivided and only on it.
M. Gustave (Ralph Fiennes) apologising to Zero (Tony Revolori) just after escaping checkpoint-19 with his help.
Another classic and commonly used method of cinematography by Wes Anderson is crab shots, frequently used in the Grand Budapest Hotel to follow characters, even when they are not in-shot, and are behind a wall or something. This is most likely done to keep the viewers attention constantly on the important vents happening, and reminding us that the characters are still the predominant focus of this scene. It also avoids cutting, as seen when the camera crabs right to reveal a dumbwaiter, and then left just afterwards to show a door, and then the same after that to show a group of men running.
Once again our attention is brought to a ladder by it being placed directly centre-frame. Theres also an example of Andersons stylistic unconventional directing when he breaks the 180 degree rule. But then a shot-reverse-shot is done to establish that one of the escaping prisoners is making eye-contact with a prisoner in his cell.
The escapees looking through a vent door, into the unexpected guard room.
A wide-shot is shown after this, into which the characters enter frame. However, the whole sequence contains less wide and extreme long-shots than the rest of the film, probably done to create the feeling of claustrophobia in the prison. After a 90 degree pan and a dolly, a wide-shot is used to show the size of the prison wall compared to the escapees.
A rare birds-eye-view shot then occurs not emphasise the size of the checkpoint, and then one of the only extreme wide-shots is done to create a change in atmosphere, since we are now outside, and to show how small the escaping prisoners are in comparison to the massive prison.
The prisoners shielding away at some prison bars, once again perfectly/symmetrically framed.
Lighting is also used particularly in this sequence, usually to bring the viewers eye towards a particular area, such as a path, button and vent. The prisoners are then shown looking down from this vent into the guards’ quarters, in a worms-eye-view. During the ensuing violence the camera is kept on this same shot to record the reactions of the onlooking escapees, and then the aftermath of the fight is shown in a birds eye view, framed symmetrically, as per usual with Wes Anderson, through the trapdoor.
The sequence expertly combines lighting, crab shots and panning to avoid cutting, symmetrical shots and wide and long-shots to portray a carefully planned escape sequence.
Cultural/social: The film evokes the feeling of wealth and nobility. This is apparent in the luxurious state of the hotel in its prime, strict rules and standards for the staff, fashion, expensive architecture and good service provided to the customers. It is clear that the people staying there have lots of money, and their clothing even feels very similar to nobility fashion of the time period and region of Eastern Europe in the twentieth century.
Historical/political: The film is not actually based on a real book or event. None of the historical events are real either, though the fascist soldiers in the film, such as Edward Norton’s character, are definitely intended to represent a mixture of various dictatorships that arose in Eastern Europe in the twentieth century. the war that occurs later on in the film is also possibly in reference to events like the Yugoslavian dissolution, or other violent historical periods. That period in history is probably what inspired the filmmakers to create this specific environment and time period for the movie.
Institutional: The Grand Budapest Hotel obviously has many similarities to some of Wes Andersons other films, such as the Fantastic Mr. Fox (2009). This evident style of editing, pacing, and cinematography of his, involving Long and wide shots and periods of silence, probably influenced the location and set of the film, and even uniforms, and the actual architecture of the hotel, which was possibly made to help match the extreme wide-shots familiar to Andersons style.
Technical: Wes Anderson employs wide shots and crab shots regularly to stay focused on particular characters in frame. This is done to avoid cutting in the movie, so long-shots are common. Another interesting detail is how the actual hotel is not real, and the interior lobby was just set up inside a vacant department store in Germany.
The Grand Budapest Hotel was released in 2014 and is directed by Wes Anderson. The film chronicles the history of how the famous and extravagant Budapest Hotel came to be the quiet and forgotten establishment that it is in modern day. the majority of the film follows the hotels monsieur, M.Gustave (Ralph Fiennes) and the new lobby boy, Zero (Tony Revolori), and the various events that occur after the death of one of the hotels most wealthy clients, Madame D. (Gilda Swindon).
The story is told to us, the audience, by the author of the book(played at this point by Tom Wilkinson), The Grand Budapest Hotel, who recounts when he was younger (and played by Jude law) and visited the hotel only to meet its owner, Zero (F. Murray Abraham) who tells him the history of the hotel, and how he came to own it. Even after these mixed perspectives, the whole film seems to be from the view of a woman in modern day, who is simply reading the book that holds the story of the hotels rich history, which we see in the film.
the author of the Grand Budapest Hotel (Jude Law-on the right) converging with M. Jean (Jason Schwartzman- on the right) on the matter of a new guest at the hotel.
Wes Anderson is known as a very stylistic director, which is completely apparent in the Gand Budapest Hotel. He seems to refrain from cutting as much as possible, which leads to most of the shots in the film being quite long and drawn out, often long-shots moving to keep up with the characters, or wide-shots done to encompass as much of a set, such as the hotel lobby, or characters, such as the scene in the red elevator, as possible.
The movie is also split into parts, such as part 5 “the second copy of the second will”. These occasional breaks in the story give the audience a split second to recollect. The reveal shot of what the new part is called also creates the sense of a grand play, which could of been what Wes Anderson was trying to replicate, or, and most likely, a book, since that is what we see at the beginning, that the story is a book in modern day.
M. Gustave (Ralph Fiennes) entertaining some of the hotels guests.
I believe that The Grand Budapest Hotel holds an important place in film history. It is instantly recognisable, and goes to show that in-conventional means of direction, narrative and sequencing in a film can add style and charm to it, setting it apart from other movies. The film is only 7 years old, but is still regarded as a cult classic for its witty and funny dialogue, lovable characters, and compelling story.
I personally loved this movie to bits! I thought that it was hilarious, and excellent from a subjective filmmaking perspective, despite its initially odd and even comical style. The shots are immersive and beautiful, the cinematography and editing is masterful, the performances are all outstanding and even the mise-en-scen is detailed and adds to the distinct atmosphere of the movie. I believe that perhaps Wes Anderson was trying to convey a message about how ethnic minorities were treated in early 20th century Eastern Europe, and how fascist governments effected the ordinary people there, as seen in the prison sequence and tragic ending to the story.
Zero (Tony Revolori) getting used to his new job as lobby boy, being supervised by M. Gustav (Ralph Fiennes) at the desk behind. A good example of a wide, encompassing shot in the film.
For this part of the course the members of my group filmed and then produced/edited their own recreation of the opening credits scene from Reservoir Dogs(Quentin Tarantino,1992) in which all of the main cast walk towards the camera to the song Little Green Bag by the George Baker Selection band. To edit this sequence, the recreated clips and original audio from the film were inserted into the editing software LumaFusion. I was not part of this process since I was off school at the time, so, like everyone in the group, I was messaged the clips and audio and then inserted them into LumaFusion. I then matched up the audio and visual clips so the shots were placed to properly replicate the way they were edited in the original films sequence.
The new and improved reservoir Dogs opening scene.
Here is the same mind map with the questions on the left answered. The questions were about representation in the film, The City Of God, and involved things like how the gangsters were portrayed, and who was not represented in the f ilm enough, and why.
This mind map shows the different aspects of representation in film. These involve how people or groups of people are portrayed in film, there is areas of representation, expressing representations, shortcuts to representation, and audience readings of representation.
This mind map was updated by me. Now all of the questions have been answered on the left hand side. It explains how aesthetics are used in The City Of God, and what effects they have on the audience and the overall film, particularly looking at those used in the opening chase sequence, such as over-exposure, handheld camera usage, and placing the camera low to the ground.
For this task we looked at the core study area of aesthetics in film. These are style and zeitgeist. The mind map also covers the meaning of aesthetic in film, and how it may impact the audience.
This mind map shows the various different contexts that a film can be made in. There is institution, political, historical, social, and cultural. The mind map also includes the questions that one would ask to gain a complete understanding of the film, The City Of God.
“Social Definition: How films can communicate truths about the society they portray and are influenced by the society in which they are produced. For example: Sorry We Missed You (Ken Loach, 2019) explores the contemporary problems of zero-hour contracts and poverty. For example: The Breakfast Club (John Hughes, 1985) contains casual racism and homophobia that was common in teen comedies of the 1980s.”
“Historical Definition: How films portray history and are representative of the period in which they are produced. For example: Dunkirk (Christopher Nolan, 2017) explores from a modern perspective the experiences of soldiers retreating from an approaching army in the Second World War.”
“Political Definition: How films portray and are influenced by the politics of the society in which they are produced. For example: The Hurt Locker (Katheryn Bigelow, 2009) questions the role of American soldiers in combat.”
“Technological Definition: How films are influenced and limited by the technology available at the time of their production. For example: the increasing use of CGI, 3G and IMAX in films at the beginning of the 21st Century.”
“Institutional Definition: How films are reflective of the industry in which they were produced. For example: the highly stylised 1960s Hammer Horrors and the superhero focus of Marvel studios.”
This mind map covers the key elements of the form of the film The City Of God. It shows different aspects of its editing, sound, cinematography, performances, and mise-en-scen.
We recently created a mind map in I-Thoughts of the key elements of film form. This involved 5 categories, cinematography, sound, editing, mise-en-scen and performance. In these separate categories we covered the more minute details, like different methods of editing, camera shots and movements, types of sound and performance methods, and even the things that miss-en-scen entailed. We covered every detail and put them into the correct sections on the mind map.
The City Of God was released in 2002 and directed by F. Mierelles and K. Lund. It tells the real story of young boy Rocket(Alexandra Rodriguez) who lives in Rio, known by everyone who lives there as the city of god. The course of the film shows how the various characters in the city operate in the city’s drug and weapon trading, gang violence, and other crimes that run the city.
The story is told through multiple flashbacks and foreshadowing to events that happen in the future. The film begins by showing part of the ending sequence, capturing the viewers attention immediately by showing,briefly, how the events climax at the end. This makes the audience want to know what events lead up to this, and who the characters are. Throughout the rest of the movie, usually when characters are fist introduced, the scene flashbacks to their backstory, introducing them and giving the viewer a general idea of what they are like.
The City Of God is a very atmospheric film. The set design is perfectly made to picture a poverty stricken, crime ridden environment. The buildings are cramped close together, everyone’s clothes are dirty, there is trash and stray animals everywhere, and by doing this you are constantly drawn into the film. You are made to feel a part of it, like you are there, and that is why the film can be so distressing at times.
The movie also has some great characters. Particulars like Knockout Ned(Seu Jorge) are introduced later in the movie, but still have fascinating arcs and can get the viewer to relate to them, sympathise with them, and keep invested in them and how they change throughout the film. Even the main villain, Lil Ze(Leandro Firmino), who is completely despicable and unforgivable because of his actions in the film, is interesting and enjoyable to watch. He also represents a lot of the themes in the film. How crime can corrupt young people, someone can become obsessed with something, and lose compassion for others.
Whilst on the subject of themes, it is worth explaining a few of the movies’. The city of God is a sad and ironic name for the one depicted in the film. The statue of Christ The Redeemer stands looking out upon the city of Rio, but all that we infer from the film is that, if anything, he is not there. Also, the film starts off showing all of the characters as children. As the movie progresses, we see them grow up into adults, but at the same time we see how they become more and more corrupt and lose their innocence. Characters like Lil Dice, who start off as a small kid with dreams of becoming the king of the city of God. Later on in the film, Lil Ze is an adult who has murdered and raped, sold weapons and cocaine to children. He is the perfect example of the effect gang mentality has on children, and his corruption and abuse of the children in the film is what makes his fate all the more fitting, symbolic, and satisfying. His corrupting of the kids in the city is what came back to bite him.
The City Of God perfectly summarises its main theme of the loss of innocence in the pursuit of revenge in Knockout Ned’s story. He starts off as an innocent man whose life is completely ruined by Lil Ze. In his pursuit for revenge, he begins to kill more and more innocent people, until he almost becomes a second Lil Ze. And when he comes the closest he ever did to getting revenge on him, Ned is killed by a young boy who’s own father he had previously killed in a bank heist. This and the ending of the film subtly emphasise how crime leads to death which leads to revenge, and then to crime, restarting the cycle.
The theme of death is also prevalent in the movie. There is a lot of death in the movie, usually depicted through extreme violence and brutality. It is also portrayed through the way that characters are killed off. The people in the film are introduced to us, the audience, and usually after we establish a connection with them, they are killed off, and in an extremely horrible or disrespectful way too. It goes to show that no matter how good of a person you are, you will end up in the dust with everyone else, killed by the hand of one psychopath, who was made by another, and another, and so forth. Most characters we see grow up, develop, grow, and then we see them shot and left to die in the streets, like an animal. It shows off the true brutality pop gang violence, and how there is no God in The City Of God.
The film is also extremely difficult to watch! There a few scenes involving child abuse and rape that are incredibly shocking and disturbing. They are made this way, I imagine, to imprint the sight of violence and cruelty on the viewer, making more of an impact on them and getting across the film’s message too. The message being to not seek revenge, and remain innocent, even when everyone around you, no matter how good of a person they are, eventually succumbs to evil. Whether they are killed by it, or become it themselves.
I personally loved watching The City Of God. Despite how tough some of the scenes were to watch, I still feel like I’ve learned an important lesson of how some people are forced to live. It was an uncomfortable story to witness, but one that I will never forget, for that reason. The film was also very enjoyable most of the time. The characters were interesting, the film was engrossing, and it was all weaved together seamlessly. I rate The City Of God ★★★★★!
The Revenant(Alenjrando Gonzales,2015) is a historical drama that follows Hugh Glass(Leonardo DiCaprio), an American fur trapper in the 1820’s who is ruthlessly mauled by a bear, then left for dead by his co-workers, played by Tom Hardy and Will Poulter. The movie is brutal, gritty and violent, and follows the character of Hugh Glass almost constantly, as he, against the impossible odds before him, hunts the man who betrayed him for revenge.
Leonardo DiCaprio delivers one of his best ever performances in this film, one so powerful that it won him the Oscar for best actor. He perfectly portrays the image of a broken and revenge-obsessed man, with only one thing on his mind. Thoughts of violence. His past is mysterious, which draws us to him as a character, and his struggle is entirely believable too. Every hit he takes feels genuine, and you can just tell hoe tired and damaged he is by the end of the film. He actually feels like a ghost, a man who is supposed to be dead, but was killed in so brutal a way that he has come back to avenge himself and his son. A haunting performance, and one of the most investing and sympathetic character that I’ve ever seen in a film.
The movie is also stunning! The cinematography won an Oscar, as it should of. The images of 17th century America are genuinely breathtaking, and are so grand and powerful they they feel almost unreal. It also shows how unlikely Hughs’ chances are at survival, since the environment is so hazardous and intimidating. It really portrays the image of a grand, powerful environment, almost one not made for man to roam, and one that is yet in-tamed or colonised.
The film Is also incredibly violent. Usually violence in films can seem pointless, or just there for show. While violence rarely subtracts from a film, it can be used to add to it. In this, violence and gore is used to display the brutality of life at this time, in this place. It is used to portray how evil people could be, and how selfish everyone was. No one cared for another person, only looking out for themselves. It almost feels like a post-apocalyptic movie. It reduces people to their primal instinct, almost like animals. Also, the violence is used to have an impact on the audience. If the movie was not violent, then it would be less of an experience on the audience, and they’d be more likely to forget it. More violence has more of an effect on those who see it.
Another way that Gonzales immerses the audience in what is happening in the movie is by using very prolonged and lengthy shots. These often just follow characters moving between places, but, whether being used in a slow-paced scene or an action sequence, this method of filming brings the audience into the scene, making them feel like they are there surrounded by all the violence. The camera cuts between characters, but when following one, it is usually just one long continuous shot, following them but also paying attention to details in the background. This also helps build tension and show the events happening around the character were following.
The movie also splendidly helps the viewer grasp just how harsh the environment is, and immersing them in the time period. All of the costumes feel real because of the dirt and grime on them. The weapons are accurate, and the environment is cold and cruel. You feel everything that the people in the film do. You can get a very good idea of just how cold and brittle the landscape is. It is this immersion that makes The Revenant such an experience. You feel uncomfortable watching it, because you see and feel every injury inflicted on Glass, and gauge just how awful it would be to be in the situation that he’s in.
Gonzales also does an incredible job at portraying each characters motives. There are four characters in question, all of which, despite only one being the protagonist, you understand perfectly. Glass(Leonardo DiCaprio), Fitzgerald(Tom Hardy), Bridger(Will Poulter) and Henry(Domhnall Gleeson). Hugh has been betrayed and abandoned in an extremely horrible way. All he had was taken from him, right in front of his eyes, while he couldn’t do anything about it. It is a miracle that he is even alive, so all he has to life for is vengeance. Fitzgerald has found himself in a sticky situation. While serving his best interests he has left a man for dead, but now that that man is back from the dead and looking for revenge, Fitzgerald is terrified and desperate to crawl out of the hole he dug for himself, and Hugh Glass. Bridger is a young boy, terrified about what he’s been dragged into, only wanting to escape the responsibility of Fitzgerald crimes, and the consequences of his own gullibility. Henry is a local lawman, who wants to be fair and honest in his justice, but finds that more and more difficult in a world where everyone serves themselves, and revenge and chaos run rampant.
Understanding every character is crucial for gauging why people do what they do, and what leads the film to the fates of everyone. Right from the start of the film Gonzales establishes the personality’s of the the characters and their philosophies, and at the end of the film that leads them to their fates. For example, Fitzgerald has seen the darkest sides of the world, and has been tortured to the point where he can only care for himself, but that’s what leads him to ruining what’s left of Hughs life, which eventually leads to Glass handing Fitzgerald over to the Natives, the very people to made him such an evil person. Full circle.
Lastly I will touch on the more subtle undertones and meanings in the movie. The one that I noticed was the relationship between Hugh Glass and the Native Americans. At the start of the film we see that Hugh has a Native son, but this does not stop him from engaging in battles with tribes, like at the beginning of the film, where we see much violence shown from both sides, the fur trappers and Natives. So after establishing that Hugh has a personal connection with the Natives, but still is violent towards them, the movie starts. Hugh’s son is ripped away from him, and he is forced to go on a somber journey to avenge him. The hypocrisy of killing Natives but still being heart broken over his sons death shows that Hugh is a flawed person, which sets off the start of his punishment.
Throughout his quest, Hugh is both hunted by Natives and also finds comfort with them. At first he runs from them, but as the movie progresses, he meets more and more Native Americans, even establishing friends with some, and going as far as to risk his life saving one of them. His relationship with the Natives is completely subtle, and is hard to notice, except for when you think about it. It quietly improves over the film, until Hugh almost only ever see’s them. He lets a group of Natives kill Fitzgerald, and by this point at the end of the film you understand that he has completely let go, and accepted that this impossible land that has almost consumed him, ultimately belongs to those who were here first, and handing over the man he has travelled so far to kill is his form of sacrifice for his wrongdoings to them.
The film also subtly references Native American beliefs on the environment in which they lived. The grand, beautiful shots of the landscape, with Glass as such a tiny, minuscule presence in it symbolises his life being at the mercy of the world around him, almost humbling him. The film never presents Hugh as an unstoppable force, but a ghost, a husk of a man travelling through a world with no mercy, slowly accepting his fate and weakness. Native Americans used to value paying respect to the Earth and its creatures, so being mauled by a bear and forced to trek through America is a fitting punishment for Glass.
The movie even ends with Hugh seeing a vision of what we assume to be his child’s mother, a Native American woman. So after all of his trials, as it were, Hugh is finally taken up by his deceased wife, after finally establishing a respect for the people he has waged war with for years. A somber, beautiful ending.
Overall, The Revenant is a gritty, hard to watch adventure of revenge and obsession on the surface. But underneath there is beautiful, meaningful story of punishment and redemption. Made perfectly, and impossible to look away from, The Revenant is a modern masterpiece that I rate ★★★★★!
For this task, we had to film our knock knock joke again. However, we had to improve on the mistakes that we made in the last one. For starters, we had to follow the 180 degree rule. We had to also include an example of match-on-action, and a shot, reverse shot.
We followed the 18 degree rule by staying on the right side of an imaginary 90 degree axis between the two conversing characters. We did match-on-action by having a character reach out for a door handle, and then in the next shot show them opening the door. And the shot, reverse shot was by showing one person talking in one shot, facing to the right, then the other person talking back to them, facing to the left. This shows that they are talking to one another and maintaining eye contact.
The 180 degree rule is a basic filmmaking technique used to show the audience where two characters are in a scene. This is done when two characters are facing each other in one shot, and the camera is placed to show they are looking at each other. So, when the camera is on character A, and then cuts to character B, character B will remain on frame right of character A. Basically, the camera always stays behind an imaginary axis between two characters, or a character and an object.
Matching on action, or cutting on action, is a filmmaking technique that shows one shot, then cuts to another that matches the first shots action. This is done to show the correlation between what a character is doing, and the immediate effect that their action has. A basic example is someone reaching out for a door in one shot, then their hand turning the door knob in the next shot.
Shot, reverse-shot is a technique in filmmaking that’s used to make it look as if two characters are looking at one another. It is done by showing one character looking at the one off-screen, and then a reverse shot of the other character, now on-screen, looking back at the first character shown, who is now off-screen.
What went Well: We did a few correct things in our movie. We used the face close-up correctly, and also delivered our lines properly. We also removed all shots where the broomstick was visible in frame.
What went wrong: We broke the 180 degree rule, so it looked as if the two characters in the film weren’t talking to each other, or even facing each other. I also left in a moment when an actor laughs in my editing, and the scene when the actor turns around at the end.
What we were told: Mr Randman said that we needed to adhere to the 180 degree rule in the future, and to refrain from editing our movies in iMovie with filters or slow-motion without being told to.
This is our groups finished production of a normal knock knock joke. After assigning roles and getting our equipment set up, we started filming or scene. It took a while to decide how we should go about filming this scene. At first it was going to be one continuous shot, then it would alternate between people and follow one character. We ended up deciding on just switching between different positions where the camera would be placed.
We also decided to have a close-up of my face, and for the other person in the film to run away and the camera follow them. A few shots we had to retake, due to the broomstick appearing in shot. After filming, the director sent all of the clips to everyone in the group. We then went off and separately edited their clips and placed them into correct order one iMovie. After that, I saved the video to my camera roll, uploaded it to YouTube, and then embedded it into this here blog post. This is my explanation of the filming process, production and editing, and final touch-ups. Done.
Up until 1892 film wasn’t really film. It was just a meagre sea-side attraction, something that rapidly played images to create the illusion of a moving photo. The first film was invented in 1892, when inventor and entrepreneur Thomas Edison created the kinetograph. This was the first ever motion picture camera that would play film tape. Film tape was equally important, invented by Louis Le Prince in the late 1880’s, it was a celluloid tape that, when exposed to light, would project an image. This was the first ingredient in film, the kinetograph was the plate it was served on.
Whilst innovative, the kinetograph could only be viewed by one person at a time, and through a small peephole at that. It was the Lumiere Brothers that invented the cinematographe. This was different from the kinetograph since it was also capable of projecting images! This changed everything,as it meant that movies could be viewed by more than on person at a time, cinemas could be opened up, new film making techniques could be invented. This new device could record, develop, and most importantly project film! Film-making now had the capability of becoming an industry, rather than a curious novelty.
On December 28, 1895, the Lumiere Brothers filmed a movie. It took place at the Grand Cafe in Paris, France. This was one of the biggest innovations of the decade, and opened up thousands of possibility’s for aspiring directors, starts, producers, etc.
George Melies also had a big impact on the creation of film. One day George was filming with his camera, when suddenly it turned off. He turned it back on again and proceeded filming, but after watching the tape that he’d produced he noticed when the camera turned off, everyone in frame tuned into something else! Men were replaced with women, a woman with a horse! Melies was the first person to realise that substitution splices could be used to make it look as if the camera was swapping places. Now, film didn’t have to be one large continuous shot, but could be recorded in multiple places, and swap whenever. This shocked audiences, as it was such a new innovation in the world of cinema.
A Trip To The Moon(George Melies, 1902). Georges most famous invention. The iconic image of the rocket hitting the moon is a famous example of his method of substitution splices.
George Melies is also said to have introduced double-exposure in film in 1898. This was another trick that George used to simulate illusions on the screen. This involved paying two tapes over one another, exposing both of them to light to create a moving image, but letting one stop at a point and the other continue. This creates the image of two separate rethinks happening at the same time. It was used to make it look as if a ghost was leaving someones body, or their spirit leaving their unconscious body, as seen in the 1924 comedy Sherlock Jr.(Buster Keaton, 1924).
Since film was becoming a massive industry by now, more people wanted to make money out of it. In December of 1895 the first cinema was established. This provided a means for filmmakers to show their works to bigger audiences, and make profit from the ticket sales. Most cinemas were actually just made from old theatres though, since they were the main from of entertainment up until now. This provided a means for movies to become an enormous industry, and with the creation of Hollywood it was now seen as a golden opportunity to invest in.
This is why in 1893 film studios were established by entrepreneurs. These companies started to set themselves up in Hollywood, and found new ways of making money. They would project movies on bigger screens, with bigger, more beautiful stars. Company’s like Warner Bros and Paramount competed for more sales. They bought actors from each other, battled over better directors, invested in larger screenings. They knew that they would make more if they made it an experience for the viewer. They bought the film makers, studios, equipment, and the cinemas in which they screened the films. They utilised this massive industry for a massive profit, and became extremely powerful from it.
Colour was first implemented into film in 1917, in the movie The Gulf Between(Wray Bartlett Physioc, 1917). It was accomplished by playing a film through two projectors, one with a red filter and one through a green one. This was revolutionary, and played a pivotal role in making films come to life! Up until this point synchronised sound was not an aspect of film, and the only audio in a movie was typically music added in for effect. There was no dialogue until 1927, when actor Al Jolson ad-lobbed a few words in the movie The Jazz Singer(Alan Crosland, 1927). This was massive, as now messages didn’t have to be conveyed to the audience through text on the screen or the way that the actors moved.
Hollywood in the 1940’s, at the height of its golden age.
AMarriageStory(Noah Baumbach, 2019) is an academy award winning movie that follows play director Charlie(Adam Driver) and actress Nicole(Scarlett Johansson) who are going through a divorce, and the movie follows their individual struggle, changing relationship, and desperate fight for custody and integrity in a painful and destructive situation.
Firstly it would be good to pay some attention to the way that the movie plays out. It tends to follow Nicole for a while at the start, just before she and Charlie separate, and this time is used to tell what her side of the story is like. The way that she presents her story makes her ex fiancé Charlie come across like the selfish one in the relationship, using his wife and never doing as she wanted. But later on in the film we seen what Charlie does when he’s alone, and since he is more hesitant than Nicole to hire a lawyer for the divorce, it takes a lot more time to see how he perceives things, and how he feels of the marriage and his ex-partner.
This grounded format of story telling makes the characters feel real and genuine, almost like they are being documented, not written. The way that the protagonists act, usually imperfectly, exposes their flaws and shows to the audience what kind of people they are. Their differences let us know why they are divorcing, and why you can’t route for either one of them, since both have character flaws and moments of selfishness.
The movie also cleverly uses film en scen and cinematography to convey subtle messages to the audience. The best examples of this are how often objects are placed between two characters to show that they are divided. This is obvious in the images above, used early in the film so say, without words, how the two characters in frame are related. Close but separate. Together but apart. This also happens when one character goes into another room but the frame remains on the person outside said room, to emphasise that there is a subtler meaning behind this.
Another thing that I noticed about the story was the cruelty of it all. A big aspect of the film is how Nicole and Charlies story is slowly used more and more by their lawyers to attack the other ones case in the divorce. The lawyers are not villains, you understand, but they are very aggressive in court, and over time make their clients look more and more selfish and greedy, making the relationship between Nicole and Charlie worse, despite their best intentions and efforts to remain friends. But one thing that I noticed early on in the film was that Charlies style of play directing seems to focus heavily on the emotions of the character. We see in a brief scene how he portrays his characters and symbolises their emotions, through dramatised and artistic directing and scenery on stage.
It is an ironic twist of fate later on in the film that he and Nicole, who often acted in his plays, should have their own emotions twisted so bitterly, to the point where Charlie and Nicole are almost acting out their own tragic play. Except in real life, the way that people portray their emotions is a low more raw and ugly, as seen in Charlies later breakdown. So it is almost like Charlie is learning that real life is different from his plays. He has no control over it, and his emotions are on display for everyone to see. His obsession with doing only what he wanted to do was the main reason Nicole divorced him after all, and we see as the movie goes on Charlies desperate effort to have control grow and grow, and this is symbolised through his fight for custody. Over his son, Henry. And the ending of the film shows that Charlie must come to accept he can’t control real life, and must settle for being content with what he has.
Adam Driver plays the husband, Charlie, in the film, and his performance is one of the most genuine and real I’ve seen in a long time. He was nominated for best supporting actor, but I honestly believe he should of won it. His crying is heartbreaking to hear, his anger feels real, and his trying soon becoming desperateness creates a flawed but sympathetic character. Scarlett Johansson also gives an incredible performance, one that won her a nomination for best supporting actress. Both of them are so realistic that you are completely engrossed in their story arc’s, development, and emotions. Even to the point where you forget it isn’t.
Their son, Henry(Azhy Robertson) is also used strategically as a plot device to reveal more about the characters. He is still a character in himself, but is mostly there to show what Charlies motivation is, how Nicole views her ex husband, and why they are struggling here. Charlie wants only to new a good father, Nicole wants to be more of a mother, without Charlie looming over her, and how the marriage is failing due to their failure to share their kid. A goal that they end up striving towards through realisation of their flaws and shortcomings as parents and people.
I think that that is the main message that the director, Noah Baumbach, was trying to convey. No matter how much you may hate someone, or how much you fear you may lose to them, being kind to those who rely on you id the kindest trait that one must try to have, and never forget. At their end of the day, when all is settled, the best thing that you can look back on, is the memories where you did something for someone else, and forgave someone for doing something wrong to you. And even forgiving yourself for your own inadequacies.
I personally loved this movie! I thought the writing was raw and compassionate, the acting real and believable, the pacing perfect and the story a strong and engrossing one. This movie is beautiful and truly a piece of art. I was never bored, confused, or in-interested. I wanted to know how this story ended, and when it did I was happy for watching it. I rate A Marriage Story ★★★★★!
ColdWar (Pawel Pawlikowski, 2018) is a Polish drama that follows two characters. Young woman Zula (Joanna Kulig) is an orphan seeking refuge after the events of World War 2. She finds shelter in a home ran by two music tutors, one being pianist Wiktor (Tomasz Kot) with whom they promptly fall in love together. Throughout the course of the movie these characters are pulled apart and then brought back together throughout the Cold War, and puts focus on the strains on their relationship, their emotions, and how they adapt to the new changes in their surroundings and culture of the times.
The story is told by following the characters individually for long periods of time, showing how they live alone and how they have changed since the start of the film. The director also brings the viewers attention towards the background a lot, by having the characters in frame usually far away from the camera or taking up a small space in frame. This shows how the culture of the times are changing, when you see fashion change, peoples behaviour, I.e kissing in public, and music change to match the time period. When the characters meet up, there is a lot more dialogue, and often they are placed closer to the camera, to display their emotions, and symbolise how close they are in that moment, physically and emotionally.
The narrative is structured in a way that shows how much time is passing and how the protagonists deal with the situation they are in. You see every seen or so, usually once the characters go their separate ways again, that another few years have passed. This conveys how much the people in love actually get to see each other, and how this effects them. Hence explaining why they act the way they do in certain scenes, and also how time has passed in between these scenes that we see. We see the characters by themselves, then together, then apart again after a few years.
I personally reacted to the film in a positive way. I appreciated the way that the director subtly incorporated hints as to how the characters are feeling and how the test of time has influenced them both. It is a compelling Ballard of how war and political conflict, borders and prejudice effect the ordinary people on the ground, and how love is changed by it. I think that the directors wanted to say how the delicious made by the people at the top effect those who have no say in them. And how love will persist over time, but the people are changed, for better or for worse, by the test of time.
We created this iMovie of we didn’t start the fire by splitting the verses between our five group members. Depending on the verse that you were assigned, you would collect the images in said verse and then place them into a Dropbox folder that we could all access. Then we would place, in order, all of the images into an iMovie file, and add the music to it, making sure that the images match up to the lyrics being said at that time. Then we uploaded the iMovie to WordPress, and here I’m writing my description of how we did this.
No Country For Old Men(The Coen Brothers, 2007) is a crime/thriller directed by the Coen Brothers. The movie tells the story of Luwelin Moss( Josh Brolin), a young hunter who one day accidentally stumbles across the crime scene of a drug deal gone very wrong. Upon finding a brief case of 2 million dollars, Moss decides to take the money and run, attracting the attention of local sherif Tom Bell(Tommy Lee Jones), and ruthless killer assassin Anton Chigurah(Javier Bardem). As the movie goes on, more characters are introduced and more are killed, as the events gradually escalate into a 2 hour long sequence of suspense and violence, in a country unfit for old men.
One of the best aspects of the movie is the character of Anton Chigurah. Played to a T by Javier Bardem, who actually won an Oscar for his performance, this unstoppable force kills almost everyone who he meets in the film, and savagely mocks his prey with taunts and ironic philosophical questions, before putting them to the gun, or the coin. In a few instances in the film Anton gives his victims the choice of heads or tails, and if they choose what side the coin will land on correctly, they win. If they lose, they die. These moments make for some of the best scenes of suspense in cinematic history, but they also serve as a metaphor of death, and the complete randomness of it.
We see throughout the film the completely brutal efficiency and violence that Anton dispatches people with, and his complete lack of emotion and hesitance in doing so. After a while, it may become evident that Anton is almost a walking image of death. But in these coin toss scenes, we see that he still has his own set of morals. If they win, he lets them live, and vice versa. But in these moments the Coen Brothers show that Anton, like death, is random, and may or may not happen at any moment, hence the 50/50 chances of the coin toss.
Anton Chigurah(Javier Bardem).
Another aspect of the film that makes it so successful and beloved amongst film lovers and critics around the world is its genius scenes of suspense building. Scenes such as the coin toss moments are extremely good at creating tension, both from the excellent writing, acting, and use of cinematography. There is also no music whatsoever in the movie, which is perfect for creating suspense and letting the course of events play out uninterrupted, and lets the audience stay immersed in the situation. The mise en scene is also utilised well, with a lack of interesting items in the background of a scene, The Coen Brothers direct all attention on the characters and the things happening in the foreground.
The sound design also plays a crucial part in the method of suspense building in the movie. The long, drawn out silences build suspense, and these can go on for minutes at a time, with the only noises being footsteps, the wind, or even just the breathing of the character in the shot. This massive suspense is, in some scenes, slowly bled out, like in the first coin toss scene, where nothing intense happens, but the viewer is left on edge from the suspense built up throughout the scene. In other scenes though, that suspense comes to a climax in a sudden moment of intensity. This happens a few times in the movie. For example, when Anton arms himself, and then slowly approaches the motel room. He takes his shoes off to avoid making noise, which quietly signals to the viewer that something violent is about to occur. At the same time, the perspective cuts back to Moss, who is desperately trying to drag the briefcase of money through a vent. The lack of noise up to this point makes the squeaking of the case on metal an agonising moment of nail biting tension.
The way that the perspective keeps on switching between Anton and Moss is how the directors make the audience wonder what will happen next, and if Anton will enter the room as Moss has his back turned, or if Moss is prepared. The moment when all of the drawn out suspense climaxes is when Anton’s cattle gun shoots out the lock of the motel room, which, due to an abundance of silence up to this point, is extremely loud and shocking to the viewer, making it an effective use of built up tension. The intensity and violence of the events that follow are just the icing on the cake of this already incredible scene.
Lighting is also used amazingly throughout the movie. The way that shots are often placed on dark areas force the viewer to wonder whether or not someone or something is there. In some scenes, Anton is mostly covered in shadow from being in darker areas, and this is a good method of making him seem inhuman. Like a monster hiding away from the light, making him and even more terrifying antagonist.
All in all, no Country For Old Men is one of the most intense, immersive, exiting and engrossing movies of all time. It has one of the most terrifying yet believable villains in cinematic history, uses lighting and sound design to create suspense, and expert cinematography to keep attention where the Coen Brothers want it to be. It is easily one of the best movies of all time, and that’s why I rate it 4 and a half stars!
I understand that in component 1 we are looking at varieties of film and film making. Component 1a is Hollywood from 1930 to 1990. Here we will be analysing films like Casablanca and Bonnie & Clyde. In component 1b we are doing U.S film since 2005. Here we analyse 2 of 4 films, including no country for old men and la la land. In component 1c we cover British films since 2005,like trainspotting and this is England.
Component 2 is global filmmaking perspectives. 2a is global film, where we look at one film in Europe(pans labyrinth), and one of two from outside of Europe. 2b is documentary film, where we look at sisters in law. 2c is silent cinema, and here we can choose one of 4 movies to analyse for our answer. 2d is experimental film from 1960-2000.
Finally, in component 3, we write, produce, and direct our own short film.
Parasite(Bong Jon Ho, 2020) is a South Korean thriller/comedy that won the Oscar for best picture award in 2020. The film is about a vey poor family, the Kim family, that live in slums, who have to be crafty and smart to survive. This involves small work for little cash, using neighbours wi-if, and opening their windows for free irrigation. They live like this, until the son of the family, Ki Woo, manages to fake his credentials to get a job as a job as a Tudor for the extremely wealthy Da-Song family. The film follows the course of increasingly intense events that lead to one family leeching of another, and questions are brought up of who’s right, who’s wrong, and what’s in the basement?
The story is told through sequences some times. For example, there is a short yet extremely important sequence about halfway through the movie that quickly yet effectively shows how the Kim family cons and manipulates the Da-Songs, and it does this through a quick series of clips that convey how the plan was formulated, executed, and its consequences. The scene is genius, cutting expertly from how Ki-Woo invented the script for his father to use, to how they worked together to make the current housekeeper look like she has tuberculosis, and how they went on to replace her with their own mother. Aside from that, the movie starts, the events play out, and then it ends. It is completely linear, but the way the director, Bong Joon Ho, utilises every moment and scene and shot to show the viewer what the protagonists are thinking, and what they will do, is genius, as it does not patronise the audience with lots of exposition, and instead gives the content in an entertaining and clever format.
I loved the film! I thought that it was extremely clever how Bong used scenery, cinematography, and Mise-En-Scene to deliver the events of the story and the motivations and personality’s of the characters, who are all well written, played, and executed in the movie. I think the overall message of the film was that trying to lie and cheat you way to the things you want will only bring you pain, and you run the risk of losing the ones you love. The best way to achieve your goals is to do it honestly, so you can be happy in the end. Otherwise, you will make mistakes, and lose track of who you are, dragging those who matter to you doing with you, just like Ki-Woo.
The first film that I remember seeing in the cinema was Avengers assemble. I remember loving it so much that we went back to see it 3 times! Once with my dad, once with both my parents, and once with my friends. To this day it is still one of my favourite superhero movies, and I definitely loved every second of it!
There are two movies that had the most profound emotional impact on me. The first one I saw was the Nightingale(Jennifer Kent, 2018).This is an extremely gritty and violent period piece, about a woman who’s life is destroyed in one horrific scene by a group of corrupt British soldiers. This is easily the most distressing and difficult to watch movies I’ve ever seen. But the effect slavery had on the Australian aborigines, and the violence displayed in the movie, had a big impression on my viewing of the film, and hence why I will always remember it. 5 Stars.
The Nightingale(Jennifer Kent, 2018).
The second movie with the most profound emotional impact on me was Into The Wild (Sean Penn, 2007).This is a film that tells the true story of Christopher McCandless, a young man who abandoned his home and family to live a more simple and, what he expects to be, a more calm life in the Alaskan wilderness. When I first started the movie, I was expecting to laugh at the ridiculous ideas of the protagonist, since what he was doing seemed so wild, no pun intended, and insane. However, as the movie went on, you, the viewer, see more and more into the inner thoughts of Christopher, and you come to understand his reasons, and even find him somewhat relatable. This is what makes the brutal ending so much more impactful and hard-hitting. I learnt a lesson of looking after family, knowing your limits, and the value of life in this movie, and I wont forget it. 3 and a half stars.
Into The Wild(Sean Penn, 2007).
The most obscure yet wonderful film that I think everybody should check out is The Peanut Butter Falcon(Tyler Nilson, Michael Shwartz, 2019).This is a nice little film about a man with down-syndrome who manages to escape from the care home where he is being kept. After this he meets up with a guy who finds himself on the run from a whole lot of debt, so that agree to run together. This movie has heart, wit, laughs, and a nice, easy to get, yet important message that was displayed well throughout the film. I loved this movie, and I absolutely recommend it to anyone who likes feel-good movies, or any movies for that matter. 4 Stars.
The Peanut Butter Falcon (Tyler Nilson, Michael Schwartz, 2019).
Auteur means a director who influences their film so much that they qualify as its author.
The director that I have been assigned is Alfred Hitchcock. Born in August 1899, Sir Alfred Joseph Hitchcock grew up to be one of the most recognised, influential, and respected filmmakers of all time. He first entered the industry, however, as a title card designer in 1919. Before this he had trained as a technical clerk and copy writer for a telegraph company. In 1925, Alfred directed his first, debut film, The Pleasure Garden. His first major success came in 1927, in the form of The Lodger, A Tale Of The London Fog. This was soon considered a factor in shaping the thriller genre. Also, two of his 1930’s thrillers are considered some of the greatest British films of the twentieth century. Hitchcock moved to Hollywood by 1939, and by this point in his career he was of international importance and reputation.
Whilst in L.A, he produced an impressive amount of movies, starting at Rebeca in 1940, and a series of films throughout 1940 to 1945. These included Suspicion(1941), Shadow Of A Doubt(1943), and Spellbound(1945). What made Alfred so beloved was probably his signature “Hitchcockian” style of directing. This involved using the cameras movement to follow a characters view, which would immerse and involve the audience in the story. He also often carefully and expertly framed shots, which was used as a method of suspense building. Perhaps it is this iconic style of film making that earned him the nickname “the master of suspense”.
Hitchcock directed his most famous movie in 1960, this being the horror/thriller psycho, which is where the infamous shower scene originates from. Another remarkable achievement of his was displacing citizen Kane(Orson Wells, 1941), as The British Film Institutes choice for the greatest film ever made. Even now Citizen Kane is considered by many film critics as the best movie of all time, but no one can deny the genius and expertise of the master of suspense. Alfred Hitchcock passed away in April 1980, only four months after being knighted. He also won the AFL life achievement award in 1979, and BAFTA fellowship in 1971. He won 6 Oscar’s in his time, 5 of which being best picture awards.
Psycho(Alfred Hitchcock, 1960). The shower scene.
Was Hitchcock an auteur or not then? I think that it is clear from the massive impact that Alfred had on cinema as a whole, let alone his own productions, that he absolutely was an auteur. This as well as his genius and iconic style of filmmaking make it clear that Sir Alfred Joseph Hitchcock was so unique and clever and revered in his craft, that he absolutely became the author of his own movies.
My name is Finley Cairns. I have chosen film studies to make use of my natural love of film and all things cinema, from the production of film, inception of the ideas, and execution of the final product. Every time I’m watching a movie, I’m in between total enjoyment and fascination and studying the film, trying to pick apart its subtler meanings and/or messages, since there’s always more to every shot.
My blog exists to record and archive my learnings in the subject of A-level film studies, take notes, and express my feelings on particular films and projects we cover in the course.
BLADE RUNNER 2049, aka: the greatest sequel of all time!
Finley Cairns A-Level Film Studies Blog 
You must be logged in to post a comment.