Solaris directed by Steven Soderbergh, was influenced by Andrei Tarkovsky Russian science fiction classic of the same name, originally released in 1972. Soderbergh says in an interview, “I hadn’t ever really come near science fiction before, mostly because the hardware aspects of science fiction don’t really interest me. What appealed to me about this story was it wasnt about that at all, i mean it is a love story at its core.” Film as an art form is meant to be explored and expressed through various lenses of people. What may seem like the same idea may add up to two completely different films. These perspectives are what make film an art form as well as a form of media that can be warped dramatically from creator to creator. Author Patrick Nabarro writes in an article titled, Soderbergh’s Solaris: A Superior Hollywood Remake, “The tale is age-old: an examination of the poignancy to be found in remembering a lost love. Whereas Tarkovsky’s film was a cerebral engagement with concepts of memory, relativity and Lacanian theory, Soderbergh’s is a classy, narrative piece – no more, no less.” Solaris is a film that tells a story of a planet that can read people’s minds, and traps its visitors by providing physical thoughts of loved ones that they miss. The catch is that the planet only knows as much as the visitors know about their loved ones. As the film opens, we learn two astronauts have died in a space station circling the planet, and the survivors have sent back alarming messages. A psychiatrist named Chris Kelvin played by George Clooney is sent to the station. When he awakens after his first night on board, his wife, Rheya played by Natascha McElhone, is in bed with him. We later learn that some time earlier on earth, she had committed suicide. Soderbergh’s approach to a romance plot with elements of sci-fi and unexplainable instances come from much of the dialogue from Chris and Rheya accompanied by slow movements within the frame. Although the film did not do so well when released and has been seen as a failure film in comparison to other films Soderbergh directed. Patrick Nabarro interestingly notes that, “The obstacles to remaking Solaris must have been obvious even at the outset. To some extent, they are still identifiable in the end result. It always had the whiff of something that could end up falling between two stools. On the one hand, it was never going to satisfy the purists likely to claim sacrilege against Soderbergh’s temerity to even deign to remake a film by the great Tarkovsky. On the other hand, genre buffs would be frustrated by the almost complete lack of action or spectacle. Furthermore, by chopping an incredible 70 minutes off the original film’s running time, Soderbergh naturally had to compromise on Tarkovsky’s abstract, languorous approach to the subject matter in exchange for a much more concise, structurally-refined approach (although many might argue there is real skill in abbreviating a dense and unwieldy 166 minutes of Soviet arthouse solemnity into a precise and slick 98-minute Hollywood vehicle).” There are many opinions on what a film has to have or shouldn’t have within the cinematic universe of style and design. Soderbergh tells the story in a clean and easily comprehensible way. Tarkovsky demands patience from his audience. Although the main ideas are similar people tend to tell their own stories through their own perspectives based on their experiences. Film as an art form can be used to illustrate personal experiences, political protests and questions, or be a simple experiment within the cinematic universe. Through the film Solaris, Soderbergh incorporates multiple genres into one film creating an easily digestible story for a mainstream audience as well as expanding his own experience with filmmaking and cinematography. Sources: https://oneroomwithaview.com/2017/08/22/soderbergh-solaris-superior-remake/ https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/solaris-2002 https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/solaris-2002 Night Moves [2013]Kelly Reichardt always includes her personal expression as a female into her films through content and style. Commonly rejecting mainstream film making methods, for example her unique work with westerns through Meek’s Cutoff. She focuses on issues of gender, where most of her films have female characters as the lead, but rejects the label of a feminist filmmaker. As an independent filmmaker she uses small budgets, filming on location, and refusing to romanticise the relationship between character and struggles. Often addressing gender issues in her films, in her thriller, Night Moves, Dakota Fanning's character serves as a strong female counterpoint to Jesse Eisenberg's male protagonist, and the film's environmental story line reflects eco-feminist values. Reichardt expresses her values as well as proposes questions for the audience to reflect on throughout her films. In Night Moves, Reichardt pointedly studies a trio of eco-activists determined to claim a kind of justice for nature by destroying a hydroelectric dam and monumental symbol. As the film continues, “Reichardt carefully destabilizes the tight group of activists by setting in motion a triangle of distrust that ratchets up the film’s carefully measured tension, pitting Jesse Eisenberg’s nervously intense, self-righteous leader against Peter Sarsgaard’s ex-Marine with a secret past and Dakota Fanning as the group’s troubled conscience. A New Age spa and back-to the-earth communal farm are viewed with measured, but sympathetic, distance by Reichardt, who asks the viewer to ponder why declared concern for the environment is all too often translated into self-serving lifestyle choices.” Within a similar structure to common heist films, including; the planning, the execution and the aftermath of success or failure the film executes a thrilling film through layers of implied ambiguities. Zachary Wigon interviews Kelly Reichardt, On the Nuance of 'Night Moves', Kelly Reichardt states, “Well, it's not a morality play, it really is a character film. They happen to be political people. The film, to me, is really also about how people operate when they're in a community versus how they operate on their own. There's the community of the co-op, there's the documentary film screenings community, the people who go camping in their RVs, people who enjoy nature while exploiting it, jet-skiing in a reservoir that used to be a forest. So there's all these different communities, and there's a lot of ideas floating around in them. There's different levels of radicalism. Some people grow their own food and only use rainwater. I hope that the film is asking questions. Obviously, the true radicalism is a dam that takes what was once a forest and makes it a playground for sports. I use electricity, but most dams aren't providing electricity. The shit the BPs of the world are doing is way more radical than anything in the movie - but you know, that's all legal. So there's all these different levels of what's radical. I think the film is asking, if their actions are not the right response to the state of things, what is? Are there any good answers out there? There's no message, but if there is, it's that question - it's not a message, it's a question.” Proposing that films should be reflected on, what questions can you ask yourself. Reichardt brings up a good point explaining the different levels of certain topics and what the appropriate response is to detrimental circumstances regarding the environment as discussed in Night Moves. Film creates a space in which ambiguities and layers of complexities, just like the real world, can form and the audience can react however. Whether it’s questioning the film, reflecting on possible meanings, or for simple enjoyment: the imaginative space that film offers is one of my favorite art forms and allows for open ended conversations and questions.
11 Comments
Spike Lee was introduced to art at a young age with his mother being an art educator and his father being a jazz musician. Lee earned a master in fine arts in film and television from the New York University's Tisch School of the Arts. As an independent black filmmaker Lee has always been willing to share his passion for sociopolitical causes by any means necessary throughout his films. From his first feature film, She's Gotta Have It, a black and white drama about a Brooklyn woman juggling relationships with three different men.. New York Times film critic A.O. Scott wrote that the film "ushered in (along with Jim Jarmusch's Stranger Than Paradise) the American independent film movement of the 1980s. It was also a groundbreaking film for African-American filmmakers and a welcome change in the representation of blacks in American cinema, depicting men and women of color not as pimps and whores, but as intelligent, upscale urbanites." As his film career has succeeded time and time again with other films like, Do The Right Thing (1989), Malcolm X (1992), as well as exploring racial issues through jazz in Mo Better Blues (1990) and romance in Jungle Fever (1991), Spike Lee made politically and socially relevant films that were important during the time and still today. In Lee’s 1998 film, He’s Got Game, Ray Allen, a professional basketball player, played Jesus Shuttlesworth. After his father is sent to prison for allegedly murdering his wife/Jesus’s mom, he is left to be raised by everyone else surrounding. From his uncle who raised him to his coach Jesus is deemed as a basketball idol in his community and faces pressure from the people in his life not because they care but because they want to be around for his inheritance for his talents, dedication, and hard work. Even Jesus’s girlfriend is pretending to like him in order to convince him to sign a deal with a sports agent/family friend. Essentially a coming of age story, Jesus is left without honest guidance, no one loyal around him (except his cousin and sister): left alone to figure out the process and although scared, he attempts not to show it. Unlike an intense sports movie, where the entire time you're waiting for the big game, followed by the big win. In He’s Got Game, there is no big game or big shot moment. Roger Egerbert writes, “This is not so much a movie about sports as about capitalism. It doesn't end, as the formula requires, with a big game. In fact, it never creates artificial drama with game sequences, even though Ray Allen, who plays for the Milwaukee Bucks, is that rarity, an athlete who can act. It's about the real stakes, which involve money more than final scores, and showmanship as much as athletics.” Throughout the film, Lee offers an intimate perspective of the game and the stakes of what ordinary kids experience when going down a path of an athletic career as well as the difficulties of growing up as Jesus Shuttlesworth did. The opening scenes of the film shows children of all economical and racial backgrounds playing a game of basketball, the simplicity of the scene offers a larger meaning. From the article titled, A Look at Spike Lee's 'He Got Game' 20 Years Later, author Will DiGravio, writes, “though the film is an effective critique of capitalism, it is also a celebration of its purest form: athletic competition. Unlike the cheating and inequality that defines big business, two things define basketball: how good you are and how hard you are willing to work to be that good.” He’s got Game, is a perspective of pure talent and passion for the game and all that matters is what you put out onto the court. Throughout the film, Lee offers an intimate perspective of the game and the stakes of what ordinary kids experience when going down a path of an athletic career as well as the difficulties of growing up as Jesus Shuttlesworth did. The opening scenes of the film shows children of all economical and racial backgrounds playing a game of basketball, the simplicity of the scene offers a larger meaning. From the article titled, A Look at Spike Lee's 'He Got Game' 20 Years Later, author Will DiGravio, writes, “though the film is an effective critique of capitalism, it is also a celebration of its purest form: athletic competition. Unlike the cheating and inequality that defines big business, two things define basketball: how good you are and how hard you are willing to work to be that good.” He’s got Game, is a perspective of pure talent and passion for the game and all that matters is what you put out onto the court. Sources: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/he-got-game-1998 https://filmschoolrejects.com/a-look-at-spike-lees-he-got-game-20-years-later/ http://thelastdetailfilm.weebly.com/he-got-game-19981.html Death By Hanging [1968]Director Nagisa Oshima was a Japanese film director and screenwriter. a pioneer of the Japanese New Wave in the 1960s, The new wave was a movement was a loosely connected group of filmmakers inspired by national social change and unrest that were motivated by taboo subject matter, including sexual violence, radicalism, youth culture and deliquency, Korean discrimination, queerness, and the aftermath of World War II. Oshima, being one of these filmmakers, created one of his most confrontational works, Death By Hanging, released in Japan in 1968. Ōshima's key themes, most notably are a need to question social constraints, mortality, capital punishment, racism, and to similarly deconstruct received political doctrines of Japan in the 20th century. Set in Japan, a korean victim named, R, is set to excuted by hanging for a murder by Japanese officials. The opening scenes take the audience through the ‘gates of hell’ into the western style home-like chamber which is offset from the rest of the prison. Through narration we learn that R is given his being given his last rights to one last meal and last cigarette. After this moment, R is taken to the back chamber, where he is hanged but a problem occurs, his heart continues to beat. The narrator explains that this can sometimes last for up to 15 minutes. The film continues with what the guards will do with a condemned person who will not die. Based on the historical background of Japan and Korea between 1910-1945 where japan occupied the korean peninsula extorting Korean citizens and creating generational friction. Death by hanging exmaines the historical background of Japan's record of racial discrimination against its Korean minority. Throughout the 20th century Japan had banned importing Japanese media into Korea and stereotyping the Korean citizens as an inferior race after colonizing the country. These stereotypes were common enough that Oshima utilized his cinematic position to enlighten and question the social constraints as well as political doctrines. In the article, Death By Hanging [1968]: A Brillaint, Provocative Work Of A Anti-Authoritarian, author Arun Kumar writes, “The thematic pursuits and heavy-handed social realist messages might make viewers to consider“Death by Hanging” a film that only relies on dialogue. Yes, there’s a heavy emphasis on dialogue, but Oshima’s film-making style (cinematographer: Yasuhiro Yoshioka) plays a vital role in staging the situation’s intricacies as much as the earnest speeches. The tight compositions of the chamber at times give an uncomfortable feeling – an element that defined Oshima’s visual language. In the re-enactment scenes of R’s family, the frames zeroes-in on R’s in-actions so as to indicate his powerless nature in the hostile socioeconomic structure.” Kumar continues, “The big, blazing image of Japanese flag is a recurrent visual motif. In front of the sun-mark flag of Japan (commonly known as ‘Hinomaru’) the impassive District Attorney sits, gazing at the enacted familial tribulation of R. It indicates how much the establishment and the national identity burdens R’s position. When R opens up his thoughts, the flag drapes his body as if it is trying to bear his inner burdens. Finally, we once again see the white empty space adorned by the flag and poker-faced attorney, symbolizing the obliterative image of those identities. The performances are delivered with astounding spontaneity and zestfulness, especially that of the Education officer character, played by Fumio Watanabe.” Through Oshima’s use of non-realistic "distancing" techniques inspired by other art forms of responses to political and climate change like theater practitioner Bertold Brecht or Jean-Luc Godard, a french filmmaker rejecting nuances of traditional french films. Oshima specifically examines Japan's record of racial discrimination against its Korean minority, by including elements of absurd political satire and distant visual techniques associated with the cinematic new wave in a densely layered narrative.
Days of Heaven, directed by Terrence Malick, was a project that was put together quietly between Malick, the producers, and close collaborators which was then shot in the wheat fields of Alberta, Canada. Malick had described his idea of, Days of Heaven, as “a drop of water on a pond, that moment of perfection.” Acclaimed as the most beautiful film of all time, Malick utilized a variation of techniques and styles that were both new and old throughout the rise of Hollywood movies such as; narration by a young woman, various popular elements of western genre, and the use of slow cinema. Days of Heaven is a film that Roger Ebert describes in his blog as, evoking “the feeling of how a child feels when it lives precariously, and then is delivered into security and joy, and then has it all taken away again--and blinks away the tears and says it doesn't hurt.” The pain and beauty throughout the film are constantly moving along and through unforgettable cinematography by two famous cinematographers, Nestor Almendros and Haskell Wexler; Days of Heaven became an inspiration for many other films. Narrated by the youngest protagonist, Linda, the tone of the film has been called elegiac. She follows her older brother Bill and his lover. Abby, from the outside of Chicago to Texas, to get jobs in the wheat fields. Bill tells everyone that Abby is his sister and many people question their relationship which ultimately leads to a fight and an ill farmer falling for Abby, asking her to stay with him past harvest on his farm. We understand most of the story through Linda’s point of view and narration. Linda states, “He [Bill] was tired of livin' like the rest of 'em, nosing around like a pig in a gutter,” so he told Abby to live with the farmer for a year until he dies so they can take that money and live happily ever after. Although, throughout the year Linda notes that, “Instead of getting sicker, he just stayed the same; the doctor must have given him some pills or something.” Through a younger perspective and arguably an outside perspective of a love triangle unfolding, Linda may not be necessarily credible but allows for a more childlike narrative as well as observations that perhaps a child could only see or understand. Unlike the Linda’s narration moving the film along, the mise en scene throughout Days Of Heaven shows the characters in wide shot which allows for a larger frame for mostly outdoor/natural details, including; the fields, sky, horses, wild life, horses, rivers, rocks, and various plant life. Roger Ebert notes that. “Malick set many of its shots at the "golden hours'' near dawn and dusk, when shadows are muted and the sky is all the same tone.” The lighting is one of the most important stylistic choices to enhance the poetic aesthetic that Malick originally intended for the film. The shades of orange and subtle shadows throughout the film help keep the tone light as a young character narrates while also creating beauty in the same space while also amplifying the genre of western films to what may be recognized today. In relation to setting up perfect moments throughout the film, the cinematography keeps the film moving along at a slow but informing pace. In between the narration, visuals, and music the steady shots of landscapes and constant moving and working of the character keeps the film from lingering too long on one conversation or perfect moment. Just as Linda narrates, what she sees from the outside may not understand, the thoughts and moments are always floating away as new moments float along. Reminding the audience in both a phonic and visual sense that moments are fleeting. For example, capturing scenes such as Abby and Bill hiding under a covered wagon or laying out far in the wheat fields, illustrated Malick’s understanding of a familiar human feeling as well as successfully creating a thread of perfect and imperfect moments to portray relevant ideas and feelings. Malick utilizes a unlikely childlike perspective of life and romantics in the Wild West. Sources: https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-days-of-heaven-1978 https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/555-days-of-heaven-on-earth-as-it-is-in-heaven https://cinetrii.com/days_of_heaven.php The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford [2007]Based on a true story and adapted from the novel, Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, written by American writer Ron Hansen in 1983; director Andrew Dominik was heavily inspired by the cinematography in Days of Heaven which was directed by Terrence Malick. In an interview with American Cinematographer Magazine, Deakins says: “Andrew had a whole lot of photographic references for the look of the movie, mainly the work of still photographers, but also images clipped from magazines, stills from Days of Heaven, and even Polaroids taken on location that looked interesting or unusual. He hung all of them up in the long corridor of the production office. That was a wonderful idea, because every day we’d all pass by [images] that immediately conveyed the tone of the movie he wanted to make.” In using various elements closely tied to western genre as a whole, Malick interpreted a thorough dynamic of characters' relationships in a western universe rather than the western universe overcompensating the plot with repetitive plots and cinematic elements. Set in Missouri in 1881, this lengthy dramatic western focuses on the band of outlaws run by the most infamous outlaw of all, Jesse James. In a series of slow developing scenes, Robert Ford, a man who desperately and jealousy wants to be everything Jesse James is, devises a plan to get what he wants. Narrated by Hugh Ross, the camera follows the development of both Jesse James and Robert Ford as well as their relationship with each other. As James controls the movement of the film through his vindictive actions and behavior towards other characters- Ford precariously observes him. Unlike the childlike observational narration from Linda’s perspective in Days of Heaven, the narration of The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, is a factual based narration that fills in the audience with past information or crucial information not told through visuals. The article titled, Terrence Malick Thought It Was Too Slow: 10 Things Learned From The Revival Screening Of ‘The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford’, author Jordan Hoffman notes, “Originally, Dominik wanted a woman to do the narration. Ross was in there just as a temp track. And, as so often happens, they fell in love with the temp track. No one could do it as good as Hugh. Oddly, even Hugh couldn’t do it as good as Hugh.” It’s interesting to know that there were more aspects that Malick perhaps wanted to add in relation to his inspiration from Days Of Heaven. In a way, there lurks a question on whether the movie would have been different if the narration was by a female. Although just describing previous plot points or character history, the narration strictly informs the audience of facts rather than simple observations. In regards to the western take, there are many elements throughout that film that older westerns thoroughly utilize to reflect on the recent war. The most obvious perhaps is the subjects of outlaws and their lives during the time period. Other elements that are included throughout the film include; many robberies, trains, natural surroundings, horses, and warm lighting. In the following video, Dave Kehr contemplates whether westerns are dead. Kehr notes that the American westerns we know, follows a savior/hero much like in the Tom Ford’s film Stagecoach, but in this case Malick is changing the perspective and ultimately changing the perspective of the western genre as a whole. Westerns generally revolve around the law and society in which its shape is disturbed by outlaws, in this case outlaws are disturbing outlaws. There are no heroes in The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, there is only jealousy and violence. The film also inspired a popular video game, Red Dead Redemption 2, to utilize the scene where Jesse James and his gang are robbing the train. Shot in night time, with no excess lighting source, the video game emulates the scene shot by shot. Sources:
https://screenhub.blog/2018/09/26/things-you-should-watch-to-get-ready-for-read-dead-redemption-ii-screenhub-entertainment/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0443680/ https://filmschoolrejects.com/roger-deakins-jesse-james/ http://thelastdetailfilm.weebly.com/assassination-of-jesse-james-20071.html When thinking about the western film genre, immediately images of outlaws and sheriffs, cowboys, hostile elements, gun fights, horses, trains, and open landscapes is what comes to mind. A genre is built from a particular visual language, as tropes and images are used again and again it begins to take on a collective and socially accepted definition that can be used by the audience to quickly gather information about the setting, characters, narratives, plot points, and costume design. The history of cinema and western genre are quite intertwined as the first American film that was able to utilize all elements of the medium [moving pictures] to tell a complex narrative, was a film called “Train Robbery” made in 1903. A silent film that offered many elements that would be used to recognize the western genre as movie making was being explored. Throughout years of tossing around old tropes and re-working them, a new form of the american western formed when John Ford began creating many silent westerns around 1917. After a few tries, Ford came out with “Stagecoach” in 1939 which combined historical facts and fiction of true American western life. Thomas Schatz calls Stagecoach “a singular pre war Western with one foot planted in U.S. history and the other in American mythology. The symbiosis of fact and legend is the very essence of the film’s enduring appeal and its tremendous influence on the regenerate A-Western form." Much of the information about life in the old American west was fabricated by illustrators and novelists in which were then used for decades without any real evidence of such events occurring, such as cowboys getting into as much violence as they did. John Ford's hit western film, revolves around an assorted group of passengers aboard the Overland stagecoach bound for Lordsburg, New Mexico, set in the 1880s. Each character has their own trope and developed thoroughly from the beginning narrative introductions to the visual aspects of their characters behavior. From the perspectives of white folks including an alcoholic doctor, a prostitute, an embezzlement banker, a whiskey salesman, a pregnant young bride, and the stage coach the travelers who must contend with an escaped outlaw, the Ringo Kid, played by John Wayne, along with the threat of an Apache attack as they make their way across the wild west. In “Stagecoach: Defining the Western”, David Punch writes, “What sets Stagecoach apart from the previous decade’s westerns, though, was Ford’s focus on characters with depth and social commentary, things that the genre had been lacking. Despite their popularity, silent westerns were seen as little more than innocuous entertainment and relegated to B-List status.” Each character is put in a different social class where they are forced to communicate and come up with a solution in order to stay safe on their journey. Ford brought westerns back to life not only through complex character development of social and political views but also through the clear and deliberate scenes that left no room for confusion. Throughout the film the impending doom of an attack is pending, from the first scene to the moment of the chase. Building the mood throughout small details like urgent telegraph messages the chase from the Native Americans utilizes wide shots to establish the chaotic setting surrounding as well as intertwining close ups of each character's emotions through facial and body movement. David Cairns points out, “Ford’s technique is to erect a Wild West of the imagination, governed only by the laws of storytelling, and then go into it as an explorer, insisting on its reality by recording convincing details (like the stray colt running behind the stagecoach when it first appears)—an ethnographer of an unreal world.” In other words, through Ford’s use of complex characters and how they interact within their individual cultures brought the western genre to a new level, in relation to silent films that were made before. The visual perspective of the passengers seems follows the generic western trope of the battle between the Native Americans and the white settlers on the land. This is communicated through the wide focal shots of traveling through the wild west. Everything in the frame is deliberate for the suspenseful mood of travelling through an empty landscape while on the watch for possible attacks. Although Ford does not follow the 180 degree rule, which states that two characters in a scene should always have the same left/right relationship to each other. If you don't follow the 180 Degree Rule, or break it intentionally, it disrupts the scene and disorients the audience. David Cairns points out that “since Ford ignores it [180 degree rule] during the Indian attack, showing coach and horses crossing the screen left to right, then right to left. But since the layout of the chase is so simple, we’re not fooled into believing they’ve switched direction, and the chaotic shot changes add to the frenzy of the pursuit.” Somehow working for Ford and being barely noticeable while being focused on what will happen next. Sources: https://www.filmsite.org/westernfilms.html https://medium.com/@DavidA.Punch/stagecoach-defining-the-western-1a330b451d19 https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/1472-stagecoach-taking-the-stage Meek's Cutoff [2010]Based on a true story, Meeks Cutoff follows six settlers and their guide during the 1840s in Oregon as they are caught in a dangerous situation. They are lost with limited supplies left and the surrounding desert threatens to claim them all. Meanwhile, their guide, Stephen Meek, refuses to acknowledge that they may be several weeks off-course deciding the path with the men leaving the women outside conversations. When a Native American walking alone is captured by the group, Meek wants to kill him but one of the settlers, Emily Tetherow, stands in between Meek's wrath and ultimately saves his life in which he offers to lead the group to water in return, leaving Meek to go along for the ride. Through a thorough montage of the character’s lives before any spoken dialogue, Rechardt introduces these characters visually rather than through narrative unlike John Ford in his western, “StageCoach”. Through slow scenes and minimal dialogue the film introduces a new perspective of westerns and the life of the women that followed, or in this case took control and ultimately saved themselves. One of the most valuable and empowering ways Reichardt transforms the western genre is by giving power to female characters, such as Emily. Eric kohn writes in an article titled, The New Old West: Kelly Reichardt’s “Meek’s Cutoff”, stating that this film is “Shifting the focus from the rampant masculinity associated with most westerns to the isolation of the women in the group, Reichardt crafts a highly textured narrative that both invokes the mythology of the American frontier and cleverly transcends it.” Ironically led by a man named, Meek, the women now must protect what little they can to survive. In many ways, the film is much more femine and gentle following with stress rather than chaos. In each situation where there would have been a gun showdown, it is subverted to a non violent type of western. From the Last Detail, Brian Brem writes that “Reichardt's film deliberately engages with what has been a predominantly male genre, it demonstrates how genre conventions can create dominant impressions of gender roles (among other things) over time. Her treatment of The Indian (who also may be lost) is also an interesting response to the way directors like Ford (especially early in his career) treated Native Americans on screen.” Throughout the following scene, Stephen Meek is stating his opinion on the difference between men and women after being confronted by a woman that they are lost. Meek’s description is a clear message about the way men may have viewed women in that time. Meeks describes women as chaos in creation while men are the destructive ones. This scene is important to the film as a whole because in many westerns, gun disputes are a driving trope for the genre. Reichardt subverts this trope by only having two gunshots in the entire film. Both are Emily sending warning shots into the sky at the sight of a Native American wandering alone. in a standoff that for once doesn’t result in a gunshot. Unlike most westerns where violence is rampant, Meek’s Cutoff doesn’t need amplified action and chaos. The slow scenes create a steady but intriguing sequence in which contain feminist ideas in both style and content. Leaving an ambiguous ending to which the audience must imagine where the journey continued, Director Kelly Reichardt elaborates on this, saying "Maybe I’m suspicious of absolutes. I mean, yes, there is something satisfying about watching an old film when the music rises up and the words come at you – The End. But it would seem absurd to do that at the end of one of my films. It would just make them feel lopsided, because they’re all so short, they cover so little time. We don’t know where these people were before. We spent a week with them and then on they went." Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_Reichardt http://www.indiewire.com/2011/04/review-the-new-old-west-kelly-reichardts-meeks-cutoff-243108/ http://thelastdetailfilm.weebly.com/meeks-cutoff-2010.html “To be on the wire is life the rest is waiting.” All that Jazz, is a semi-autobiographical showbiz drama based on aspects of director Bob Fosse's life and career as a dancer, choreographer and director. Initially inspired by Fosse's manic effort to edit his film Lenny while simultaneously staging the 1975 Broadway musical Chicago: Fosse felt like it was too much for him at the time and wanted to do something more whimsical and “not as heavy.” An interesting decision for a filmmaker to adapt events from his own life into All that Jazz, with a thin veil of fiction draped over the story jumping from past, present, memory, and fantasy all through montage and deliberate jump cuts in editing. Hilton Ais writes in, All That Jazz: Stardust, [about the film]“Produced and co written by Robert Alan Aurthur, All That Jazz is a world of bodies. We begin with bodies yearning to be validated—dancers auditioning for a spot in a Broadway show—even as the receptacle of that yearning, the director, Joe Gideon (Roy Scheider), chips away at his body; nothing is real for Joe without suffering, especially his own story. Joe wants fantasy to be real, or he wants the real to be more fantastic, loose, a series of improvised gestures, free of the guilt he always feels. Part of All That Jazz takes place in Fosse’s version of Orpheus’s underworld. There, Gideon talks with, flirts with, and eventually dies in the embrace of Angelique (Jessica Lange), a blonde angel of death.” The musical drama of Bob Fosse’s life exaggerated through exhilarating musical numbers and the cut away scenes illustrate an elaborate technique that throws the audience through a loop when the story isn’t told like a generic musically theatrical film. The film has all the props, stages, old costumes and glitz of show business but the action is slower and more introspective as Joe’s life unfolds from troubling past, to stressful work, relationship issues and most of all his inability to have self control. Audiences come to expect certain traits and styles used for certain genres and will continuously expect that when they go to see a movie with a story they recognize. In many cases whether the story is the same, through editing it can be illustrated in a completely new form. An editor controls how the audience perceives the film’s shots not in isolation, but in relationship to one another. Each scene forms a link to the next scene and so on, to tell a story in a different way. Fosse was influenced by Russian director and film theorist, Sergei Eisenstein, who was also a pioneer in the theory and practice of montage, believed that cinema's essential characteristic was its ability to join unrelated images together through juxtaposition, which then generated ideas. The link between seemingly unrelated images creates a deeper meaning overall. To describe his life in only a few brief moments, there is a scene where Joe is sitting in the crowd at a burlesque show, suddenly the scene cuts to what is presumably Joe’s subconscious where there is a dancer on stage, his mother cooking, and the ethereal Angelique. His mother is explaining to Angelque that Joe he always worked at burlesque clubs and “never paid any attention, didn’t even look at em” The scene quickly cuts to a young boy backstage rehearsing and preparing for his set time, as the scene continues, he leaves the room where burlesque dancers approach him and begin sexually provoking him minutes before he gets on stage. In the middle of his performance the audience roared in laughter, as the camera closed in on young Joe’s face beading with sweat, the camera pans down to show he urinated himself. Which then cuts back to his mom cooking, saying “ he's never done anything to disappoint me.” The juxtaposition of fantasy, memory, and present are evident in this series of events. The cuts are messy and confusing as we try to decipher where we are and what we are about to learn about. By the end of it, it makes more sense. Fosse deliberately makes some moments of his life longer scenes than others and we see that here. The moments we are in his mind are brief but the traumatizing moment of his life didn't get cut to a scene until it was completely over. These messy cuts give us brief explanations along with how Fosse saw how his life went and how he felt as he went down a mentally and physically destructive path. A black screen is displayed and the montage of Joe’s daily life begins, with repeating the opening scenes of Joe’s morning. Music, shower, eye drops, medication. The opening scene shows each step thoroughly but as each time the montage is repeated throughout the movie, the scenes are cut shorter to make it feel as if the repetition is getting old as we see him take more and more medications. The fast-paced cuts of these scenes increasingly become more tense as we hope that Joe will slow down and realize what he has. In the final scene of the film, the scene is cut as Joe is in the hospital to a huge musical number about how he is going to die or perhaps already dead. This ascension Fosse illustrates through actors dressed as body parts and glittering costumes as well as complicated stage transitions shows the idealization Fosse had about death. Shutting out all his problems lead to his death and through jump cuts and the change of pace in montages, we slowly but fully understand the extent of Fosse’s physical and mental well-being during the course of All that Jazz. Sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVZXQQcVa-Y https://fictionmachine.com/2021/02/16/review-all-that-jazz-1979/ https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/3275-all-that-jazz-stardust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_That_Jazz_(film) The Train [1964]After replacing the former director of The Train, Frankenheimer worked to enhance and prolong the action scenes as well as add more dialogue creating a longer and more expensive film than originally intended. The fictionalized story was influenced by the real museum curator at the time Rose Valland from her book Le Front de L'Art. Speaking upon her experiences during World War 2 and the fight to save France’s cultural heritage from Nazi germany. Although Frankenheimer's purpose was not to tell a historical documentary of events rather Burt Lancaster (Paul Labiche) focused on action and Frankenheimer juxtaposed the value of art with the value of human life. Excitement generates through deliberate staging, chaotic montages, and realistic details of events in his technique as the film builds. The Train is set in 1944, during World War 2, a time when Paris was occupied by Nazi Germany. The officer in charge of the operation, Colonel Franz von Waldheim, is determined to sneak all the paintings from the Jeu de Paume Museum to Germany by train, no matter the cost. Museum curator, Mademoiselle Villard, alerts the French Resistance and is soon helped by Paul Labiche, a railway inspector. Mademoiselle Villard is just as determined to get the paintings that she refers to as “a part of France” and with the some help, they change station names, paint the top of the train white, and many other actions in order to stop or reroute the train back to the museum without getting caught by German soldiers. The opening scenes include fast paced montage as the camera follows a focal point through the chaos of the Nazi party packaging France’s most valuable works of art. From fast paced montages to a repetition of staging using 2-3 figures there are complex layers that Frankenheimer uses to build to the excitement of the action scenes. Small details such as the staging of characters to the extent of using layers of characters dispersed behind the subject in the background. Not only is it an interesting stylistic choice to stage the character in such a way but the extended use of foreground and background of the scenes illustrate a space in which it feels like the audience is in the same room sitting in front the subject speaking and watching the other characters live around the main subject of the scene. These scenes are just a few examples of the recurring staging of characters in similar ways. The beginning of the film relies on the staging and montage of chaotic events as building blocks to introduce the overall intense mood of the environment surrounding as well as a visual strategy to convincingly stage action sequences and maintain cinematic clarity. Frankenheimer primarily used closeups in scenes such as the one above. The emotional intensity through such closeups enhances the intense emotional moments as they decide whether the cargo is worth risking human lives for. The lack of complex use of background in these scenes develop pure emotion from individual points of view. Knowing that Frankenheimer was influenced by the real woman, Rose Valland, whose story is partially told, I feel as if these scenes mean a lot more than when I originally watched the film. Close ups allow the audience to enter the characters personal space, focusing on their facial expressions and emotional reactions. All the small building blocks are carried from these few peaceful moments to generate the overall excitement for when the action begins. The next step to build excitement is the character development of whether the entire movie (the mission) will actually happen, with the hesitant railway conductor, Lancaster. In The Dissolve, author Scott Tobias writes, “The film delves deeper into the reluctant heroism of everyday French citizens, when it would have been safer to mind their own business and wait for liberation.” Everyone from Mademoiselle to Lancaster didn’t have to put their lives and others peoples lives at risk in regards to being caught by the Nazi party but they did. In the beginning of the film Lancaster explicitly states that, “This morning we had 4 men left in this group now we have 3. One... two... three. We started with 18, like your paintings madam moisel we couldn't replace them for certain things we take the risk but I won’t waste lives on paintings.” After hearing Madame Villard’s pleas and her colleague stating that “London agrees the art is important,” Lancaster agrees for the sake of protecting French cultural heritage. The master plans involve secret ways to reroute the train or painting the top white to track it, all without damaging any cargo or being found out. Along with use of a real character’s perspective and other character developments to keep the story moving one of the most realistic and costly decisions Frankenheimer made for The Train is the deliberate use of real trains rather than miniature models as well as using actual train stations. This elevates the movie as it is easily identifiable where the scenes take place as well as the enhancing overall intense mood of the general environment. In many ways it seems like maintaining visual clarity between the characters and the environment is seemingly impossible in an action driven film but as Brian Brem explains it best when he writes in his blog, The Last Detail, “Using this visual approach in a quiet moment helps the viewer respond to it more easily in a faster-paced one.” As every scene of a train takes on more elements of Hollywood action rather than using it as an historical moment, the film is further fictionalized but not compromised. The slowly building emotional scenes along with moments of abrupt chaos provokes the elements that make The Train the action packed sequence it was made to be. The following video shows the scene in which chaos erupts between the train moving, someone trying to switch the tracks and constant explosions in the background, the quick shots of each moment into a wide aerial shot is yet another way Frankenheimer maintains visual clarity between characters, the mission, and environment. Throughout The Train, Frankenheimer’s purpose was not to tell a historical documentary of events but to transform a significant historical event into a form of media that would be consumed and deemed as widely popular through deliberate staging, chaotic montages, and realistic details. Considering the value of art with the value of human life, Frankenheimer created an excitement filled ride through history confirming that action films can be just as crafty as any other film genre. Sources:
https://thedissolve.com/reviews/1560-the-train/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qDg7XCrFjTY https://www.cineaste.com/fall2014/the-train-web-exclusive http://thelastdetailfilm.weebly.com/the-train-1964.html Hardly being the first choice to title this film, director Alfred Hitchcock and writer Ernest Lehman (who would go on to script West Side Story and The Sound of Music) went through several title changes during planning, some being known as The Man in Lincoln’s Nose, Breathless, and In a Northwesterly Direction… Without a truly satisfactory title for the film, the title stayed North by Northwest. The idea came from a state of writer's block the pair had for creating a film titled, The Wreck of the Mary Deare for MGM, they decided to completely scrap that idea and start a new one, revolving around the conventional plot device-mistaken identity. North by Northwest takes you on a thrilling mainstream 2 hour adventure through the story of Roger Thornhill, a businessman working in advertising. Shortly into the film, he gets mistaken for a CIA agent named George Kaplan, kidnapped and almost killed by an enemy agent named Phillip Vandamm. Thornhill is forced on a cross-country chase from Vandamm and his henchmen, along the way meeting the blonde lover, running from a crop duster, and sliding down Mount Rushmore to find Kaplan and prove his innocence. In an interview, Hitchcock says, “I’ve also gone with the average man, the ordinary individual going through extraordinary experiences… The movie I made, like - North by NorthWest. Carry Grant, he’s an ordinary businessman, gets mistaken for a spy and goes through the most bizarre experiences, but enables the audience to relate more closely to the individual.” Known as the master of suspense, Hitchcock takes seemingly normal and reasonable scenarios, adding outrageous ideas, to elevate the suspense. Including his iconic camera zooms, deliberated soundtrack and delicate elements throughout the film to allow the audience to relate to the average man [Thornhill] despite the erratic events. At times you forget the initial plot of the film, you get so tied down to what’s happening as every scene becomes a fleeting moment into the next ambiguous moment. Screenwriter, Ernest Lehamn said in an interview with…. “One day, Hitch said to me, ‘I’ve always wanted to do a scene in the middle of nowhere—where there’s absolutely nothing. You’re out in the open, and there’s nothing all around you. The camera can turn around 360 degrees, and there’s nothing there but this one man standing all alone—because the villains, who are out to kill him, have lured him out to this lonely spot.’ Then Hitch continued, ‘Suddenly, a tornado comes along and…’ ‘But Hitch,’ I interrupted, ‘how do the villains create a tornado?’ and he had no idea. So I wondered, ‘What if a plane comes out of the sky?’ And he liked it immediately, and he said, ‘Yes, it’s a crop duster. We can plant some crops nearby.’ So we planted a fake cornfield in Bakersfield and did the scene that way. And, like you said, it became a very famous sequence. As a matter of fact, that’s how I knew that Cary Grant had died. Every channel on TV was showing that shot of Cary running away from the plane. It’s strange, isn’t it, that such a distinguished career should be remembered mostly for that one shot?” During the scene Hitchcock uses 4 shots to box the character in with an invisible wall to enhance the fact that Thornhill won't be able to escape the crop duster. The plan for this scene in particular was thoroughly storyboarded and planned out. As stated from the video, the narrator describes that the point of the scene is to confuse the audience members on where the threat is coming from. In order to do so, Hitchock uses various points of view shots to allow the audience to step into his shoes. It appears normal when the crop duster immediately appears in the far background because the setting is a field. With layers of multiple cars passing, the random man- every moment thinking that this may be the enemy agents-it concludes to a more humorous edge. The suspense slowly builds as the audience waits. Fellow filmmaker Francois Truffat noted, “ Hitchcock went against the traditional editing style… Instead of increasing the tempo of the shots during the action, Hitchcock uses pretty much equal shot duration for everything at this point in the scene.” Through a major Hollywood studio, such as MGM, Hitchcock expanded his creation from actual locations like; Mount Rushmore, pre-planted corn field, to studio built replicas. North by Northwest was designed to appeal to as wide an audience as possible while encompassing all the best elements of Hitchcock’s cinematic ideas, transforming an adventurous, thrilling but unpredictably humorous script into an overall enjoyable movie. Sources: https://cinephiliabeyond.org/north-by-northwest-quite-possibly-the-most-entertaining-hitchcock-ever/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrcYekU9GVw https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/rushmore-north-northwest/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lltazliRp58 Lone Star [1996]Independent films are often designed to make the viewer think about certain subjects/ issues. Usually featuring challenging storylines that are more realistic and less escapist than in studio films. Independent films are produced through small production companies and funded either through private investors or art agencies. The genre and style vary much more within independent films. In John Sayle’s case, Castle Rock entertainment (a company in Los Angeles, California), financed and produced his film, Lone Star, in 1996. In an interview with Megan Ratner, Sayles explained, “They automatically sell to a cable company for a couple of million, so that limits their risk. They'll decide how to distribute it depending on who they're affiliated with. Basically, you can't fart in this country without working for Rupert Murdoch or Ted Turner. I've worked with them both but never met either of them.” Basically, the film process whether independent or mainstream is paid through different ways but ultimately either process allows the artist to create they’re art- within a budget of course. Sayles was given a $4.5 million budget while Hitchcock had a $4.3 million budget on his film, North by Northwest, produced by MGM Studios. Lone Star is set in a small Texas border town in Frontera. The film is shaped around two characters and the rivalry/secrets hidden in the town. Charlie Wade (the bullying, violent, racist sheriff, who seemed to have problems with everyone) and Buddy Deeds (his successor). Sam Deeds (protagonist) is the son of Buddy Deeds returns back to Frontera where he reconnects with an old lover and is set to investigate a 30 year old murder when a human skull, police badge, and masonic ring are found in the Texan desert. Through the complex layers of character interaction the viewer learns that Buddy Deeds (described as "a cool breeze") had supposedly driven Charlie Wade out one night in 1957 and managed to ...or did he? In Lone Star, Sayles approach is entirely in service to the narrative and character development with subplots on racism, national pride, censorship, generation gaps, politics, social revisionism. Known for his use of complex layers of story development centered around topics considered taboo for mainstream media, Sayles established the web of characters through a memory-esque recollective sequence of what really happened the night Charlie Wade vanished, forty years ago. Instead of flashy or whimsical transitions and editing, Sayles purpose was character driven. In an interview with Megan Ratner, he says,“I used theatrical transitions so that there would be this feeling [that] there wasn't a big seam between the past and the present. Orson Welles did things like that every once in a while. Basically, you get a background for your tight shot from 1996, you pan away, and when you pan back to where the guy telling the story was, it's somebody completely different, and it's 1957. There's not a cut or a dissolve. I wanted to reinforce the feeling that what's going on now is totally connected to the past. It's almost not like a memory - you don't hear the harp playing. It's there.” Lone Star is most known for the realistic use of sequence shots in which scenes can change within a single shot. The following scene is shown shifting in back and forth through time in the same location which is a much more subtle directing style for a crime thriller. These simple cuts and editing decisions allow there more room for Sayles to use narrative and character development to introduce the many complex subplots as well as keeping the story on track. In Where to begin with John Sayles, Matthew Thrift writes, “Sayles’ narratives are often sprawlingly intricate, featuring large casts of characters populated from a recurring stock company of actors. The extensive research that goes into every one of his films results in a keenly understood sense of place and a focus on working people, often marginalised or oppressed – usually by the inherent violence of capitalism – across multiple strata of a given community.” The biggest difference that I have concluded from research of directors like Sayles versus Hitchcock regarding the mainstream and independent production of media is that there is a more of a focus with realistic human qualities of deep set social injustices that many people can relate to but is not represented in Hollywood style films, as talked about in the following video. Sources:
https://filmmakermagazine.com/archives/issues/summer1996/sayles.php#.WZsen-mQyUk https://www.bfi.org.uk/features/where-begin-with-john-sayles “The best way to explain One from the Heart, is that it is a musical show. It’s not a conventional musical in the sense that people start singing in the middle of a scene rather the story itself is told by songs, music, and dance.” Francis Coppola describes his 1982 film, One from the Heart, as a story about love itself told through the various scintillating scenes of music and dance on the set of a homemade studio version of the city of Las Vegas. Coppola plays with the relationship of realism and expressionism to create the visual projection of his emotional experience through colorful lighting as well as brilliant gradually dissolving transitions. A simple story of a mechanic, Hank and his partner Frannie, a travel agent, that have been together for five years when we come across the moment Frannie yearns for excitement and adventure. Their dreams become separate and as the movie progresses, it stays that way as Hank carries a jealous envy over Frannie’s decision. From a dazzling circus performer to a singing waiter, the adventure begins as we watch vibrant dancing over the terribly hard to watch representation of love between Hank and Frannie. It comes to a point where neither character is showing that they need one another in their lives. It seems to be a comfort zone. In comparison to the film, Two Days One Night, directed by the Dardenne brothers, the film is steadily shot through medium close ups and follow shots. To allow the audience to feel as if they are getting the first person perspective of the main character, Sandra’s life. The director opted for simple transitions, no additional soundtracks, clean cutaways, and natural lighting to show the realistic challenges of mental health and class struggles. Director Coppola decided to express love itself by stylized expressionist decisions of the state of emotional or psychological state of characters through intense colors that seem to come out of nowhere. I question whether these changes of lights reflect the emotions of the current state of the characters. In many scenes red is used for different emotional states such as passion and anger. To elevate his expressionistic ideas through, One from the Heart, Coppola went one step further and required the strip of Las Vegas to be man made rather than use the real location. This way every aspect of the film could be controlled such as lighting styles and small architectural details. Robert Brody and author from the New Yorker, writes, “Coppola had to create and finance the equipment that he used, and he supplemented it with some elaborate sets; the budget expanded from twelve million dollars to twenty-seven million dollars.” For such a simple plot, Coppola went overboard with elements of the film so much so that it led him straight to bankruptcy. He says, “I tried to tell a love story in a setting that was like love itself, set in Las Vegas, as a city of glitter one second and depression the next.” Which can be seen through how Frannie and Hank treat each other, all the way from the opening to closing scenes of all the film. Professor puts it best when he states, “In some ways, this is the only realistic method for producing something entirely expressionistic. By shutting reality out completely, Coppola could rebuild it as he saw fit.” The ability to control all aspects of this space with exaggerated Coppola's ideas also involved elaborate transitions. Though repeated throughout the film to suggest the separation waiting to happen a scene that stands out to me is where Leila, the circus performer, is dancing for Hank in an imaginative junkyard. The dissolving transitions aesthetically fit with Leila’s face with the sign of the blue woman, opening the beginning and closing the end of her performance. The blending of foreground and background images through transitions create a visual effect of a dream-like state. As if the scenes jump from place to place. In many ways, it throws off the audience to where they think they were with the story. Some other notable scenes that are enhanced by the dissolving transitions effect are when Hank and Frannie are in different locations but seem to inhabit the same space at the same time. Coppola’s drastically expensive decision’s and ideas produced a film that implicated emotional effects through visual enhancement of intense colors as well as the dream-like transitional pacing of the film. Along with an upbeat soundtrack and plenty of dancing, Coppola focused on aesthetics rather than plot. There’s nothing that ties the audience to any character, we are simply observing instead of reliving the moments with the characters. These many bright and obnoxious elements cover the lack of character development; thus creating a film for the aesthetic purpose of exploring expressionism. Sources: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/movie-of-the-week-one-from-the-heart https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7svT3YH9TBA http://thelastdetailfilm.weebly.com/one-from-the-heart-1982.html Clash by Night [1952]During Fritz Lang’s hollywood career he had released four films in the same year (1952) which led to a heightened critical respect for his career. One of which included, Clash by Night, a black-and-white definitive work of late film noir filled with drama, broken romance and typical expressionistic shadows. The film is adapted from a half-forgotten Clifford Odets play, involving three main characters including Mae Doyle played by Baraba Stanwyck, Jerry D’Amato played by Paul Douglass, and Earl Pfeiffer played by Robert Ryan caught up in an unforgiving love triangle. Lang utilizes every part of the frame to enhance the middle class lifestyle as well as realistic romantic states through pessimistic details of setting and characters. The opening credits scene of violent waves crashing foreshadows the film as a whole best. A wave represents forthcoming events and hidden emotions which implements well with the characters turmoil as well as visual effects of the style film noir. The film introduces Mae, a bitter and cynical woman, moving back to her hometown, a fishing village in California, after sometime in New York. Mae moves in with her brother, Joe Doyle, a local fisherman. Mae soon catches the interest of a guy with a large heart, Jerry D'Amato, who owns the boat Joe works on and meets Joe’s brutal friend Earl Pfeiffer. Although Mae has a strong and adventurous spirit she settles down with a man who is safe and cares for her, rather than have nothing at all, Mae lives like this even though she soon grows to become unhappy. Mae contradicts what she wants when says in the film, “Confidence. I want a man to give me confidence. Somebody to fight off the blizzards and the floods. Somebody to try to beat off the world when it tries to swallow you up.” She doesn’t just want to be cared for; she wants someone who will make her feel strong and yet not feel emasculated by it. Which is why she begins to have an affair with Earl and falls in love with him. Fritz Lang has been referred to as the father of one of the first noir films ever made, after the notorious 1931 release of M, and although Clash by Night, is a lesser known film he still is able to bring subtle aspects of shadows and dark features throughout the film to enhance how the intense and passionate emotion of the love affair. Lang reaches out and not only uses shadows from windows such as when Earl and Mae sit at the table together but also utilizes dark symbols such as waves crashing against the rocks. After Earl drunkenly stumbles to Mae and Jerry’s home, he talks with Jerry on the porch before passing out. Jerry carries him to an empty bed and soon goes to bed himself. The camera pans across the bed, as we see Mae is not there. She is standing by the windows smoking a cigarette late at night, staring at the waves crashing. Lang’s realistic use of shadows in settings and detailed placement of characters implies a story through visual effects rather than dialogue. The spaces of darkness and symbolic use of waves enhance the noir style as well as create a pessimistic mood that reflects Mae’s state of being and overall happiness. Critic Adrian Martin argues that “it [mise-en-scene] can transform the elements of a given scene; it can transform a narrative’s destination; it can transform our mood or our understanding as we experience the film.” The gloomy visuals of the fishermen village environment and pessimistic attitudes of the protagonist give the film an overall dark mood. As the film persists, we reach the point to where the secret is out: a scene starts in the kitchen, an arid affair between Mae and Earl arises. She’s chosen the type of man she wants and they "clash by night". Mae finally admits her true emotions by explaining to Earl that, “It's me, me, something in me… The days go by, down to the grocery store back to the house, hang out the wash, take out the dishes from the closet. Go to bed. Wake Up. Shut your mouth, close your eyes, this is the man you married. This is the life you’ve made Expect for nothing. Hope for nothing. And every day a little older, a little dumber, a little stupider. Love is superstition..Without love there is nothing.” Mae finally admits to herself and everyone around her dramatically that shes living the life she never wanted to live. An article published in 1952 from the New York describes the love triangle best when stating, "Miss Stanwyck is professionally realistic in the role. Paul Douglas is a physically convincing portrait of the simple, muscular and trusting Jerry. But it is difficult to take his extreme idealistic devotion. As the lover, Robert Ryan is natural in his depiction of a man groping for a way out of a lonely existence." Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/1952/06/19/archives/odets-clash-by-night-on-screen.html http://www.sensesofcinema.com/2002/great-directors/lang/ http://www.noiroftheweek.com/2009/04/clash-by-night-1952.html The 1940s were regarded as a classic period of American dark film or film noir. The cinematic term described the technical style of early Hollywood crime dramas, specifically emphasizing films with cynical attitudes and sexual motivations. In 1984, Ethan and Joel Coen released their film, Blood Simple, which was credited for reviving the film noir style. Set in desolate Texas in the 1940s, the film follows the injustice and loneliness that each character faces through visual elements such as windows, shadows, and various over the shoulder and close up shots. The early 1980’s offered many opportunities in the film industry to many young creatives. Many influences the Coen brothers had were from early horror films as well as the stylistic elements of film noir. Many elements which defined this style were heavy contrasts between light and dark as well as using the shadows in between to emphasize on the existence of lurking evil. A prominent scene from the film illustrating the use of shadows to hide is in the first few scenes, as Ray tells Abby he likes her and she asks what he wants to do about that. The scene cuts to them in bed with a train going by, creating shadows through the windows of the bedroom. The shadows and cut away transitions creates an immoral mood throughout the empty spaces and singular objects. It is implied that something is not right and that Ray and Abby are having an affair. The sense of hiding is a repeated theme throughout the film as Marty hides from confronting his wife and employee, Lenor hides from justice (acts selfishly rather than fairly), Ray and Abby also hide from the truth. The Coen brothers relied heavily on the heavy use of light and dark to create a lurking feeling throughout the thrilling crime/drama. Whether it's watching your back from the hitman Lenor or the boss of the operation, Marty. From the article, Blood Simple: “Down Here, You’re on Your Own”, Nathaniel Rich puts it best when he says, “Blood Simple has not one noir hero but four. Each makes a rational, if immoral, decision that initiates a Rube Goldberg–like chain of events leading, ultimately, to his or her own ruin. This is the essential noir condition—the more the hero tries to return to a lost past, the more lost he becomes.” The climax of the film hits with contrasting elements from music and mood. Ray is driving with Marty’s withering body in the back seat to get rid of the evidence. Dan began making noises in the back seat letting out final breaths, Ray jumped out of the car while the radio simultaneously began blaring the upbeat rhythm of "Lady In Red" by Xavier Cugort. Ray runs towards the field in an adrenaline kicked run from the absurdity that has become his reality. The mood changes as Ray runs from the car, music fading as he runs further into the desolate field. Again, the camera follows Ray back to the car with an over the shoulder shot. Upon closer inspection of the car, the camera moves into first person perspective panning over the blood soaking in the back seat. Throughout the film, scenes such the pool of blood, Marty sitting dead with 3 grotesque fish on the table or Abby alone hiding in the shadows from Lenor, there is a sense of being alone- every man for themselves. The frames focus on each character's perspective at a time before the whole story is able to come together through selfish acts and miscommunication the audience follows Marty’s perspective through over the shoulder shots which make it feel like we are in on the crimes as well. Professor Brems writes, “For them [films] to be works of art, you have to give them the benefit of the doubt—think about the decisions that have been made by filmmakers along the way to arrive at the end result. Cinema shares this fundamental characteristic with other art forms.” The Coen brothers emphasized the feelings of being alone through elements such as lowkey lights looming through windows, shadows casting, as well as inclusive shots that push the audience to make them feel like they are in on the malevolent drama of Ray, Marty, Abby, and Lenor. Sources: https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/4230-blood-simple-down-here-you-re-on-your-own http://thelastdetailfilm.weebly.com/blood-simple-19851.html Two days, One Night [2014]In the Dardenne brothers film, Two Days, One Night, simplistic camera angles and shots depict the raw emotional life of the protagonist, Sandra, through unraveling, emotionally driven states of mind which depend upon her determination and kindness of her coworkers to ensure that her family doesn't lose their source of housing. In Two Days, One night, the audience enters into Sandras world, first person. Sandra, a wife and mother of two is on the brink of losing her job when a majority of her coworkers at a small factory voted for a bonus instead of Sandra keeping her job. From the vote on friday, to a new anonymous vote set for monday, we follow Sandra for two day and one night as she must convince her coworkers to do the right thing and help her. Throughout the film, we gradually learn Sandra had struggled with depression and anxiety which led to her first break off of work, and showed the bosses that the work that needed to be done could be done with less people. Rather than it being directly said that Sandra is struggling with her mental health, the film shows her instead struggling to breathe and speak, taking pills in the bathroom, and dropping on the bed unable to move. A follow shot is used most notably throughout the film to force the audience to quickly identify with the character while subtly making the character's presence and actions seem first person. The simple cut aways and long timed frames, take it moment by moment as we follow Sandra through the moments of hope and hopelessness. In the Atlantic, from an article titled, “Marion Cotillard on the Political (and Personal) in Two Days, One Night”, author David Sims writes, “What might be dreadful melodrama in different hands is handled thoughtfully and with nuance by the Dardennes, who employ their usual spare style of filmmaking that doesn't seek to tip the emotional scales for the audience or forebodingly build to plot twists.” The film executes the subtle rollercoaster of emotions-not through aggressively obnoxious scenes- but through technical cinematic decisions. The lack of music throughout the film and lack of fancy transitions or effects allows for the film to focus entirely upon the facial expressions of the characters. The close ups of each moment when Sandra is done talking to a coworker leaves the audience on their toes as we are waiting for the moment of relief. The moments of relief are rare in the film, from seeing Sandra finally smile or sing to some music. These flying moments become sacred as we realize that after each conversation with her peers, Sandra only sees them as black and white, either walking away smiling or heading to bed by 7 o’clock. Her husband supports her thoroughly, in every weak and strong moment. The first moment of relief that Sandra accepts is when her husband tries to turn down the radio to bring a sense of calmness and peace to Sandra. She rejects it saying, “Stop protecting me… you thought the song was too depressing for me.” Two Days, One Night emphasizes the realistic working class struggle as well as an alignment of mental health awareness through follow shots and minimal distracting elements to allow the focus of emotion to fully encompass the audience as we all quietly vote for Sandra to keep her job. Although not getting to keep her job, the bigger reward is at the end when Sandra says that she is happy. This is the first time we hear directly how Sandra feels as well as getting the final moment of relief. |
Film As Art:
From a college film course. Note: I haven't had time to write but I've seen many new movies since taking the class and hope to find spare time to continue writing reviews based on my interests rather than parameters of a class. THANK YOU! |