What are the 5 kinds of film writing described in the article and what are the key details of each.
The first kind of film writing described is formal analysis. This requires for the viewer to break a film down into parts and discuss how those parts contribute to the film as a whole. Specific terms need to be known in order to understand. Film history is the second kind of film described. All films are steeped in history so much that they reflect history. This history also echoes the values and ideas of the culture that produced the film. Events during the time period of the making of the movie greatly influence the messages. Films all have their own history behind them, why they were made etc. Most films are only shown to certain age groups because of the levels of language and cultural responses to the culture around. The third kind of film writing is called ideological papers and they promote a set of beliefs. Sometimes beliefs are mainly political, their have propaganda uses. While watching, films may be slowly manipulating and changing our own views without us even knowing. The fourth kind is cultural studies/national cinemas. For example Hollywood films show our nation's love of distraction, our attraction to adrenaline and testosterone, the strong belief of good beating evil etc. Differences between films also reflect the differences in countries and nationalities. The final kind of writing is the discussion of the auteur. This is when we try to view the overall film from the perspective of the director. It's mostly based on the assumption that only one person retains complete control. This criticism doesn't include taking into account the actors, the producers, the screenwriters, those who do make up etc. This is useful because we are able to understand common themes present throughout the film.
What does "Annotating a Film Sequence" involve and what are it's benefits?
Annotating a film sequence is taking notes about each specific shot. By jotting down all the different shots seen, we can then later on see the pattern and associate this with the theme, purpose or genre.
What does the author imply when she says to "Think Beyond the Frame"?
Thinking beyond the frame refers to considering every other little part that helped produce the film as a whole. For example, the people who made the film. What other genres/movies have they made and why are they interested in it. It's also good to think about the production history of the film and how present conditions effected the film's production. Looking at criticisms from others is helpful also because it will help focus on specific parts of the film.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Thursday, December 8, 2011
The American Anti-Hero
What historical factors influenced the rise of the American anti-hero in cinema and how does this hero contradict the Classic Hollywood Ideology. (include 3 quotes from the doc)
First off, what is an American anti-hero? An anti-hero is someone who goes through great lengths just to achieve great things. People who could fall into these categories would be those who helped without any other purpose for the sake of helping. Ordinary people who were perceived as being more human were considered anti-heroes; women were able to be in this category also as time worn on.
There were a lot of different international relationship conflicts taking place during the time that influenced the rise of these anti-heroes. Mostly after World War II, people started to change their views of heroes as others who changed even the smallest of things in an order.
Being an anti-hero means being someone whose actions echo the state of the world around them. In Taxidriver, the main character acts because of what he thinks about the city itself (a swamp, a dirty gutter, toilet that needs to be cleaned and other references). Anti-heroes relate more to life because they have even the basic of flaws and pet peeves (maybe even more) like the rest of us. Anti-heroes tend to stay away from those over bleached wind blown picture perfect well-dressed heroes who always save the day just in time.
First off, what is an American anti-hero? An anti-hero is someone who goes through great lengths just to achieve great things. People who could fall into these categories would be those who helped without any other purpose for the sake of helping. Ordinary people who were perceived as being more human were considered anti-heroes; women were able to be in this category also as time worn on.
There were a lot of different international relationship conflicts taking place during the time that influenced the rise of these anti-heroes. Mostly after World War II, people started to change their views of heroes as others who changed even the smallest of things in an order.
Being an anti-hero means being someone whose actions echo the state of the world around them. In Taxidriver, the main character acts because of what he thinks about the city itself (a swamp, a dirty gutter, toilet that needs to be cleaned and other references). Anti-heroes relate more to life because they have even the basic of flaws and pet peeves (maybe even more) like the rest of us. Anti-heroes tend to stay away from those over bleached wind blown picture perfect well-dressed heroes who always save the day just in time.
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Intensified Continuity
According to David Bordell, explain how and why continuity has intensified in Hollywood cinema.
According to David Bordell, filmmakers have been opting for more range free cameras, changes in shot length, different lens choice and the decisions of close framing. Rapid cutting in edits also intensify and emphasize continuity in Hollywood cinemas.
What's with the free ranging cameras? With one of these, long shots no longer have to stay static since there would be no actual painstaking set up each time the camera needed to be moved. Bordell says that because of these "cameras and stabilizers like the Steadicam, the shot pursuing one or two characters down corridors, through room after room, indoors and outdoors and back again" have become well used. Using more equipment like these can help pinpoint exactly what the audience should and only see. Cranes are also used more to help reveal more of a character or too.
Rapid cutting added to the intensification of continuity. During the 1930s and 60s, there weren't many shots in films compared to the number in present day film. Bordell states that "most films are cut more rapidly than any other time in U.S. studio filmmaking" since filmmakers were seen, trying to break away from the guidelines of Realism etc. Rapid cutting allowed filmmakers to be able to distort their own movie's reality in relation to the plot itself. Bordell agreed with Pudovkin and Kuleshov's ideas but also wanted to break away and incorporate new techniques. I myself have found out that I can not stand anything less than the pace of cutting today. Since most films now have about an averafe of 1.5 seconds of a shot, I would say that this is what I'm used to.
Close ups are still personal. I think that the use of close ups in most scenes are very helpful. As a viewer, I wouldn't want to keep looking at the same two-shot waist shot or long shot of a couple of people talking (especially if they're discussing important issues as they always are). Back when film seemed to have been set up, "filmmakers felt obligated to use long shots and medium shots" because as we talked about in class before, most people didn't want to pay to see a movie and not see an actor in full. The point of focusing on one main area didn't agree with them. But as time went on, close ups became crucial for the audience to connect with the actors and the feelings that the director want them to feel.
According to David Bordell, filmmakers have been opting for more range free cameras, changes in shot length, different lens choice and the decisions of close framing. Rapid cutting in edits also intensify and emphasize continuity in Hollywood cinemas.
What's with the free ranging cameras? With one of these, long shots no longer have to stay static since there would be no actual painstaking set up each time the camera needed to be moved. Bordell says that because of these "cameras and stabilizers like the Steadicam, the shot pursuing one or two characters down corridors, through room after room, indoors and outdoors and back again" have become well used. Using more equipment like these can help pinpoint exactly what the audience should and only see. Cranes are also used more to help reveal more of a character or too.
Rapid cutting added to the intensification of continuity. During the 1930s and 60s, there weren't many shots in films compared to the number in present day film. Bordell states that "most films are cut more rapidly than any other time in U.S. studio filmmaking" since filmmakers were seen, trying to break away from the guidelines of Realism etc. Rapid cutting allowed filmmakers to be able to distort their own movie's reality in relation to the plot itself. Bordell agreed with Pudovkin and Kuleshov's ideas but also wanted to break away and incorporate new techniques. I myself have found out that I can not stand anything less than the pace of cutting today. Since most films now have about an averafe of 1.5 seconds of a shot, I would say that this is what I'm used to.
Close ups are still personal. I think that the use of close ups in most scenes are very helpful. As a viewer, I wouldn't want to keep looking at the same two-shot waist shot or long shot of a couple of people talking (especially if they're discussing important issues as they always are). Back when film seemed to have been set up, "filmmakers felt obligated to use long shots and medium shots" because as we talked about in class before, most people didn't want to pay to see a movie and not see an actor in full. The point of focusing on one main area didn't agree with them. But as time went on, close ups became crucial for the audience to connect with the actors and the feelings that the director want them to feel.
The "Arrival of a Train" and "Damsel in Distress" Response
1. How would you describe the difference in camera work: composition, angle, movement.
2. How would you describe the differences in the edit?
3. How would you describe the characteristics of the story being told/narrative?
For "Arrival of a Train", there is only one continuous inclusive take of the everything. This is basically set in a long shot; the railway acting as a vector that draws our eyes down a z-axis. In this shot, people are waiting to board the train, the train arrives and as some people get off others get on. In the "Damsel in Distress" though, there are actual cuts. This short film utilizes parallel action to build up the emotional tension; this is shown through the man tying up the distressed woman and a train about to come. "Arrival of a Train" only gave an outside point of view in the action while "Damsel in Distress" was able to have more coverage of the reactions of all the people surrounding the action. The "Arrival of a Train" is more related to Realism because in real life, the exact same thing would keep happening for people who would wait at a train station. "Damsel in Distress" falls more under Classicism because of it's use of parallel action. In "Arrival of a Train", the common goal for the people was to board or leave the bus in order to get to a place. In real life, not everything is as interesting or mind-blowing. "Damsel in Distress" shows a ruthless man and a woman who has to think on her feet in order to escape her imminent death.
2. How would you describe the differences in the edit?
3. How would you describe the characteristics of the story being told/narrative?
For "Arrival of a Train", there is only one continuous inclusive take of the everything. This is basically set in a long shot; the railway acting as a vector that draws our eyes down a z-axis. In this shot, people are waiting to board the train, the train arrives and as some people get off others get on. In the "Damsel in Distress" though, there are actual cuts. This short film utilizes parallel action to build up the emotional tension; this is shown through the man tying up the distressed woman and a train about to come. "Arrival of a Train" only gave an outside point of view in the action while "Damsel in Distress" was able to have more coverage of the reactions of all the people surrounding the action. The "Arrival of a Train" is more related to Realism because in real life, the exact same thing would keep happening for people who would wait at a train station. "Damsel in Distress" falls more under Classicism because of it's use of parallel action. In "Arrival of a Train", the common goal for the people was to board or leave the bus in order to get to a place. In real life, not everything is as interesting or mind-blowing. "Damsel in Distress" shows a ruthless man and a woman who has to think on her feet in order to escape her imminent death.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)