Last week a few of my friends and I watched some films, one being House of Flying Daggers. I have watched this film before, but when I watched it this time I noticed how amazing the cinematography was. It is probably the most beautiful cinematography I’ve ever seen. What I was most impressed by was its great use of depth-of-field, which varied extensively through the film. I was also impressed by the amazing use of colour that was used to perfection throughout the film. Through this blog post I will analyse two of my favourite scenes that both exquisitely capture something so incredibly beautiful through amazing cinematography.
The first scene I will analyse is one of the opening sequences in which Xiao Mei plays the echo game by flicking beans to hit drums around the room. The scene contrasts between close-ups and wideshots from showing the close-up of the beans in a bowl that cuts to a wideshot that contextualises the whole scene with the circular drums surrounding the room. The focus and camera movement captures each bean as it flies through the air, while simultaneously moving back to capture Xiao Mei’s movement as she hits the drums with her sleeve. The seamless camera movement creates flow and aims at capturing every slight movement. The depth-of-field captures the intense emotions of her face blurring the background, yet still moving the camera around her in a circular motion, keeping her beautifully in focus. However, it is the next shot that is truly beautiful as the camera captures a bean flying seamlessly through the air as it bounces off two drums. It is truly amazing. What is so fantastic about this scene is the cameras ability to capture every moment in such fine detail through constant seamless camera movement and a really creative use of depth-of-field. Obviously, there is so much technical perfection and every shot would have been planned in great detail with an emphasis on creating beautiful imagery.
This emphasis on beauty is emphasised throughout the film through colour matching in the bamboo scenes where the costumes match the colours of bamboo hiding within the jungle, and the impressionist-like landscapes of trees and landscape in so many colours.
However, the scene that caught me the most is the closing scene where it snows contrasting the red of blood and the white of snow. The scene begins in true martial art fashion set on a field with the colourful tree jungle in the background. There are quick cuts to capture the speed of the fight. However, the true magic of this scene starts when it starts to snow, which is shown in the first picture in this blog. It is here where colour is used in complete contrast between the darkened sky and the colourful trees, where time-lapse photography is used to cover the scene in white showing a wide shot of the two men embedded within a world of snow. As they fight the camera captures in perfect focus blood flicking through the air and landing on the snow. Finally, there is another moment when Xiao stand up and throws her dagger through the air, where the camera follows it through the air cutting between shots of all the characters faces in a surreal-like fantasy. This surreal moment is created through the zooming/tracking camera movements and the strange out-of-this-world camera angles to emphasise the tragedy inherent in this moment.
What I learnt in terms of my own production is the extreme technical detail, where colour and depth-of-field create so much emotional weight to this film and carries so much meaning. Therefore I think in any production it is important to think about what colours you want to emphasise and how you are going to do this. In Doughnut we want to have a surreal-like moment in the second last scene when Bernard walks through the workplace after ‘killing’ Jonathan. We want to have flowing camera movement and in post-prod will speed up and slow down the movement. The emphasis will be on his red tie, and we will carry an emphasis on red throughout the film to carry the blood/jam theme throughout the script. I learnt that to really highlight red contrast it against white, therefore in costuming have Bernard wear a white shirt and because all the walls in the office are white it will be relatively easy to emphasise the red.
Again I return to the digital dossier for some analysis in conjunction with this week’s theme of shot construction. To backtrack slightly into the lecture, Paul drew up a list of things that should be covered when considering shot construction, which consisted on:
- colour
- frame
- angle
- viewpoint objective, subjective, POV
- ‘area of shot’= shot size (wide, CU, etc.)
- movement
- focal length
- depth of field
These were the things that he said you should deconstruct your script looking for. I’m going to go backwards and deconstruct the visuals in some part of Ice Storm to find the meaning behind the technical decisions of shot construction. The scene that I am predominantly going to analyse is the party scene. I found this scene the most interesting in terms of the way the characters have been characterised through shot construction.
Overall the colour in the scene is warm, where the majority of the scene is filled with colours of brown, beige and cream. These colours are established through costume and set design creating a warm and welcoming environment a civil, respected party environment. I feel this because there is nothing outrageous if the scene was filled with bright purples, oranges, greens, etc. I would assume it was some form of drug induced wild party. However, from the muted brown colours it creates a respectful atmosphere.
The frame for the majority of this scene is busy, filled with characters mingling with one another, where the busy nature of the scene captures the contrast in character expressions to certain actions. For example, the shot that follows Sigourney Weaver’s character picking up the keys seductively shows the reaction of the three men that are crammed into the frame next to each other. The shot perfectly captures this contrast in feelings through action rather than words as the man in the brown jacket closes his eyes, obviously disappointed in conjunction with the man in the shirt who has a look of seductive happiness on his face expressed through a smirking smile. Therefore by placing these two characters next to each other in the frame it establishes an integral point that both these men want this woman. If they were not placed directly next to each other in the frame these emotions would not be conveyed quite as effectively.
There are numerous angle changes especially concerning the man in the brown jacket’s trip in which the camera works to convey a certain message about this character through camera angle. When the character trips onto the ground the camera looks down upon the character from above, which suggests disapproval of this character through the camera angle. This is emphasised further by the close-ups of the characters around him, especially from whom I think is his wife. The shot that comes into mind is when she flicks her eyes up and down, in not necessarily disappointment but an attempt to avoid acknowledging him. The emotion on her face is conveyed through the use of close-up and a shallow depth of field, which diminishes the background environment, pulling audience attention onto her emotion, which makes it a highly subjective moment, where the audience should feel her disappointment within this moment.
In terms of movement there is a lot of contrast between lots of movement and static. The blonde haired woman who I mentioned above is static throughout the scene, which is emphasised through a wide shot in which Weaver’s character is exiting the scene with the shirted man. The deep focal length and wide depth of field allows the audience to see her static in the background, while the numerous character in front of the frame are moving in order to help the man who tripped. This static-ness of her character suggests her alienation from the game and the childish behaviour of those around her. The tripping of the brown jacketed man suggests drunkenness, which is further emphasised by a lovely shot that happens previously when Weaver’s character picks the keys from the bowl, in which there is low angled close-up of the various items on the table including four half-finished glasses of wine and champagne, as well as two bottles of what appears to be some form of spirit. This close up contextualises the scene, obviously there has been a lot of alcohol drunk which explains the somewhat strange behavious of the characters.
Overall, it is amazing how much can be said through shot construction about character behaviour and the contrast in how characters react and behave. However, like the close-up of the alcohol and the colours of the scene it helps contextualise the setting. It makes me realise that there is so much to consider when deconstructing our script, and I feel like I will constantly be asking myself things like what does that shot say? How would that shot be different if we used a close up? Would that convey more meaning? What colour scheme would convey the most amount of meaning? There is so much to consider. So much.
I found today’s lecture really helpful and informative, as well as being entertaining I think I’m definitely going to go and watch Taxi Driver in the very near future. The main concept: SHOT CONSTRUCTION. I think I have already brushed over this when I was analysing cinematography from one of the digital dossier films in terms of how a shot is set up to convey meaning. I found both the clips shown for Taxi Driver highly intriguing in terms of their technical brilliance. They were technical brilliant because they were meticulous in everything they tried to achieve. My favourite shots were the ones that Paul pointed out; the close-up of the tablet fizzing in the cup and the close-up or more medium shot of the papers sprawled over her desk. I found these shots to reveal the most about Tom’s character, revealing his inner character rather than his outer character represented through his conversations with the fellow taxi drivers in the first scene and the girl in the second scene. They were revealing in two seperate ways. In terms of the fizzing water the image stands in stark contrast to the other shots in the sequence as it is of an object rather than a conversation between men. As brought up in this weeks reading on ‘The Director and the Actor’ it is the use of objects(props) that greatly aid in the characterisation of a character. This is highly evident within this scene through the cut to the close-up of the cup and the raise in volume ofthe fizzing that drowns out the previous conversation. In not having seen the film (and therefore I could be wrong), placing this fizzing cup as the focus of this scene it is panting Tom as anxious and problematic, which contrasts with his chatty demeanour that he has when coversing with the other taxi drivers.
In terms of the second scene (established as a scene as it was set in one time and one space) there is a brief close-up of papers sprawled across the desk, as Tom uses his hand to sweep over them, indicating that the girl is miserable in her current state. This close-up creates a pattern that reminds us of the fizzing water and I would assume there would be numerous shots like this throughout the film. This close-up indicates (as Paul referred to in the lecture) Tom’s charm and magic in convincing the girl to come on a date with him. This gesture firmly establishes his desperate desire to not only take her on a date, but to charm her in an over-the-top fashion that is thoroughly noticed by his competitor lurking the background of the frame (achieved through the use of deep focus). Therefore the shot construction is pushing what needs to be noticed, if deep focus wasn’t used there wouldn’t be the presence of the other admirer. This links to another thing that Christine mentioned as an aside in the lecture; to ask yourself what is at the heart of the script? The heart of this scene is Tom’s desire to win a date with the girl, which is achieved through the meticulous shot construction.
This led to in the lecture the approach you should take to achieve a technically competent and rewarding film, through storyboarding, blocking, creating schedules, etc. This is very important, as the reading paced particular emphasis on the need for the director to deconstruct, pull apart, analyse, contextualise the entire script. The director needs to be able to imagine, feel and answer any question about how the script is going to transcend on to the screen. The only way the film can successfully exist is through the meticulous analysis of the script and the detailed imagining of how it is going to appear on the screen.
Reference: Mackendrick, A. On film-making : an introduction to the craft of the director, (p. 179-194). London : Faber and Faber, 2004
So I’m going to deviate away from sound for just a second, and talk about something that has helped me with my script regarding thwarting desire. I saw the Hurt Locker the other night and there is this fantastic maybe 10 minute scene in which there is this constant thwarting of desire, in which things keep going wrong. The scene is when they meet other soldiers and come under attack. It is very intense as a few soldiers have already been killed. William and Sergeant Jt Sanborn are lying low with a gun aiming at the house where the attackers are hiding also shooting at them. It is here that these is this tense scene, involving running out of bullets. Sanborn notices he has no bullets, when aiming a the house and therefore asks Owen who is hiding lower down, he doesn’t have any either. Therefore desire is thwarted and suspense builds, there is no defence against the attackers if they can’t shoot. William tells Owen to see if one of the dead soldiers has any bullets on him, which he does. It is this moment when there is a sense of relief as there is now a defence against the attackers. However, again desire is thwarted as there is blood on the bullets, which jam the gun. Suspense builds again because they are unarmed. William tells Owen to rub the blood off the bullets, which is a problem for Owen as he is literally cleaning the blood of a dead man off the bullets, which is upsetting. Suspense is building because Owen is taking a long time to rub off the blood and needs motivation from William to do it. Eventually he rubs it off and they gain a sense of relief as they are now armed. This is a great scene because suspense is built so easily through the inability for the characters to reach the desire of having a weapon to defend themselves. If it was only one thing that stopped them from getting bullets then there wouldn’t be as much suspense, however with the build up of things going wrong it really creates this fear for the audience.
I learnt a lot from this in consideration for my own script because the main problem that there was not enough drama and therefore I wanted to amp the drama up by making it more difficult for Ryan to achieve his desire. His desire is to get the record he has always wanted, however this is thwarted by his wife who firstly buys it, which makes it appear that he easily reaches his desire. Yet, she doesn’t let him have it (thwarts desire), she then plays the record and then turns it off when he enters the room (he gets more frustrated) and finally she threatens to break the record (which sets Ryan over the edge). This build up of frustration makes the script more dramatic and therefore more entertaining for the audience.
