In regards to the Lenny exercise I have taken over the role of Director, which is quite challenging because I am the creative force behind the production. It is also challenging because I am producing it as well. I’ve decided to film it a dark, almost film-noir style of film, where I want to take advantage of doing extreme shots, either extreme close-ups or extreme wide-shots. I have torn the script apart and plotted out what each shot will be (it may be slightly ambitious, but we’ll see). The hardest part has been scene 3, which is the dialogue section- I want to stick with two camera angles for this section due mainly because of the time restriction. This is the overall shot breakdown of the script:
1. EXT. BOULEVARD – DAY
- Establishing shot- WS of Lenny weaving between buildings (if possible from a high angle if time permits). Lenny will stagger towards the camera.
- If time permits- CU of Lenny’s feet staggering
- If time permits- CU of Lenny’s eyes in pain
2. EXT. LANE – DAY
- CU of box clasped by a hand with painted fingernails (indicating a woman), camera tilts downwards and focuses on high heeled clad feet
3. EXT. BOULEVARD- DAY
- MCU of a puddle of blood, camera tilts upwards to show Lenny colapsed on a bench. In the background you hear and see heels approaching.
- MS Sharon cast above peering down at Lenny (camera remains at the same level as Lenny, angled up to show Sharon)
- MS over-the shoulder looking down at Lenny from Sharon’s perspective
- MS camera pans to show Sharon exiting the frame after dialogue finishes and pans back to Lenny with the box in focus, Lenny exerts all energy to unclasp and open the box as the box springs open Lenny colapses.
- if time…The camera widens above Lenny from a high angle to emphasise his death.
NOTE: Dialogue will be filmed from shot 2. and 3. of this scene, and in editing will be alternated.
I know that this seems like a lot of shots, however I have made it easier for my DOP because there is minimal camera movement- the camera does not actually need to be moved for a tracking or dollying shot. All of the camera work will be done on the tripod. Overall, I hope to create a dramatic dark film that encapsulates the power that Sharon has over Lenny. In terms of scheduling I will do scene 3 first because it will take the most amount of time to perform. I will then do scene 1 followed by scene 2.
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
