Watch at least 3 films from Edison, Lumiere Brothers, and Melies on your own. Go to the Internet Archive, select "Moving Images" from the drop down menu and search for each director. All of the Edison films can be found at the Library of Congress and can be accessed here. Please be sure to tell me the name of the film and who made it and answer the following questions:
- Do you notice anything particular about the film’s presentation of cinematic space—what you see on the screen? Lots of landscapes or close-ups? Moving or static camera? How does this differ from films you watch today?
- Do you identify with the camera lens? What does the filmmaker compel you to see? What is left to your imagination? What is left out altogether?
The Kiss (1896), Thomas Edison
ReplyDeleteThis twenty-six second film pictures a man and a woman nuzzling with one another. They appear to be in the middle of a flirtatious conversation, and in the last few moments of the shot, they kiss. The two are in the center of the picture throughout all of these happenings. It’s quite different from any average film today because of its length and especially the fact that the entire film consists of only one shot. However, in the way it is documented, the viewer does identify with the camera lens. Because the camera is static, it gives the appearance as if this kiss is unfolding in front of your eyes. Since this is the only thing that the camera is focused on, it isn’t clear as to what could be happening outside of the frame. All in all, the clip is a little awkward, but heartwarming as well.
A Trip to the Moon (1902), George Méliès
I believe this cinematic piece really defines the term “movie magic.” I have seen a “A Trip to the Moon” a number of times because of my interest in Brian Selznick’s artistic masterpiece “The Invention of Hugo Cabret.” All camera shots are static throughout the twelve minute duration and the angles stay at eye-level. It’s presented in a theatrical manner. Fade-in/fade-out is used often in order to switch shots. Also, the way in which cutting is used creates disappearing effects and a sense of magic. Personally, I do identify with the camera lens because of the eye-level point of view. George Méliès was a literal magician and he conveys this through his work by the imaginative scenery and the artistic costumes. Everything Méliès wants you to see and consider is directly in the frame. It is one of my all time favorite works because the film is incredibly fantastical and visually stunning and magical.
Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat (1895), The Lumière Brothers
Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat is a short piece in which I have often seen and read about. As the story goes, when the film was shown to the public, it is said that the audience was afraid of the moving picture of the train because it was so life-like. The legend tells that some even ran out of the theatre. The film itself is very splotchy because of the early model of the camera. There is no movement and the angle is eye level, similar to all the previous early films I described. Only the basic actions of the train arriving and people getting onto the train are shown. It’s different from modern day movies because of its simplicity. Once again, it’s easy to identify with the camera lens because of its angle. There is no story, so all is really left to the viewer’s imagination. The film is simple, yet important to cinematic history.
"Frankenstein" (1910)- Thomas Edison
ReplyDeleteThis film doesn't really utilize cinematic space as much as their modern day counterparts. All of the shots in the film seem to be open and landscape view with a static camera. This is very different from the films I watch today because with the technology we currently have, it is a lot easier and more natural to incorporate different angles and start moving the camera. I did identify with the camera lens because Edison made great use of the foreground, middle ground, and background to make these similar looking shots more interesting. There were also extremely detailed sets that added a little bit more character to each scene. In one scene, Frankenstein is speaking to his wife out of frame, but we see her reflection in the mirror as if the audience was actually there listening to their conversation.
"Le Squelette Joyeaux" a.k.a. "The Dancing Skeleton" (1897)- Lumiere Brothers
This forty-five second film is very simple because it is just a stop-motion picture of a skeleton dancing. The skeleton is the center focal point through out the film and there is a constant open landscape view of the skeleton with a static camera. I personally do not identify with the lens because frankly I didn't really understand what was happening because it was extremely choppy and parts of the skeleton kept disappearing and I didn't understand why. But that's to be expected considering the film dates back over 100 years ago, I would assume it felt way more realistic back then.
"A Trip To The Moon" (1902)- George Melies
The majority of the film consists of a landscape view with a static camera, but that doesn't stop Melies from being creative with the shots because there are numerous amounts of sets with immense detail and people in the shot. One extremely memorable scene was when the wizards finally land on the moon and Melies provides a close-up of the moon's "face". I did identify with the camera lens because the film did allow me to just get sucked into the story and enjoy it because of all the effort and special effects put into the film.
"A Trip to the Moon" (1902) George Melies
ReplyDeleteMelies does a great job of packing in as much action, satire, and excitement into a 12 minute film shot with a fixed, static camera. He utilized shots of stunning landscapes, which effectively set the tone for the viewer. Fade in/Fade out was often used to show that time had passed/space had changed. I identify with the camera lens because all of the techniques that Melies used effectively portrayed the story to me.
"The Kiss" (1896) Thomas Edison
This 26 second film was an awkward, yet heartwarming shot of a man and a woman embracing and finally sharing a kiss in the end. It was shot with a static camera and was a close-up view. Although it was only 26 seconds long, I strangely enjoyed it a lot. Something about their natural embrace spoke to me. The use of the close-up static camera made it feel so natural, like they weren't actors, and I was right there to see the heartwarming moment.
"Workers Leaving the Lumiere Factory" (1895) The Lumiere Brothers
This film was shot with a static camera somewhat from afar. I really like the Lumiere Brothers films because something about the static camera makes the film feel so real. Because the camera is fixed in the middle of the action, it seems as if the people didn't even know they were being filmed, making the film feel extremely natural. It is crazy to think that film started off as minute long clips of everyday activity and evolved into a two hour experience filled with complex cinematic techniques and captivating storylines.
Edison- "A Winter Straw Ride" (1906)
ReplyDeleteThis film was definitely quite different from the majority of the movies that are produced today. There wasn’t really a plotline or build-up to a key scene, it simply depicted regular people riding in a horse drawn carriage and playing in the snow. It seems to be more like a nonfiction or documentary-style film because of the way that it focused on people going about their everyday life. The shots were relatively long, and the shifts between shots were very blunt. The camera was static throughout the roughly six and a half minute film, and changes in space occurred only during cuts. Edison doesn’t really use editing to create special effects, only for the convenience of following the action throughout various scenes. Although the camera angle varied between shots, it was always set up so the carriages appear to be coming right at you. This technique is what causes us to identify with the camera lense, because it is shot in a way that mirrors the way we would see the action in real life.
Melies- "A Trip to the Moon" (1902)
This iconic movie by Melies seems to me to be the foundation for modern filmmaking. In comparison to other early films, it was ahead of its time in terms of editing, cinematography, and plot. The camera was static for nearly the entire film, with the notable exception of the shot depicting the man in the moon as the capsule approaches it. This specific close-up is one of the most widely known parts of the film, and really drew me in to identify with the camera lense. Aside from this, the shot also broke the repetition of static landscape shots, somewhat like movies today. Melies also takes advantage of the space in each shot, utilizing both foreground and background. Unlike most filmmakers of his time, Melies did not just use editing for the purpose of plot continuity but instead to create special effects. His use of techniques such as cross-fading and special effects created by multiple cuts within a scene were not as smooth as they are today, but they were a major milestone in filmmaking. By using these techniques, Melies was able to create images and stories unlike anything that can be found in real life.
Lumiere Brothers- "Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat" (1895)
This short film by the Lumiere Brothers was an important development in cinematic history for a number of reasons. It doesn’t really compare to modern films in most ways, but it was a brand new experience for viewers when it was produced. The entire 50 second film consists of a single shot, without any editing or storytelling techniques. The camera also remained static, focused on a close up view of the train entering the station. The Lumiere brothers did not concern themselves with varying camera angles, or creating any sort of fantasy story. Like many of Edison’s films, this movie represented realism, focusing on a part of everyday life. Despite the relative simplicity of this film, the eye level camera angle created the illusion that the train was coming straight at you. The ability to easily identify with the camera made it iconic at the time of its release, and many people in the audience were scared by the film for this reason.
"The Sprinkler Sprinkled" (1895)The Lumiere Brothers
ReplyDeleteThe static camera shot from medium distance landscape used all the space that filled the entire frame and the actors moved from center screen toe left and back to center. This short comedic film uses only the space in the frame where as now we have evolved into moving cameras and seeing different angles and spaces. I enjoyed the short comedy and it is similar to todays comedic videos like vines or other social media clips that you can see that there's a small storyline and relate to the people on the film just joking with each other.
"The Kiss" (1896) Thomas Edison
I enjoyed watching this heartwarming close up static camera shot that showed me a couple just sharing a moment together naturally that was captured on film. The space is very small and personal which shows the intimacy and love that the camera lens identified to me.
"Serpentine Dance" (1899) The Lumiere Brothers
This short film involved color unlike the other ones that I watched. The static camera shot with the use of color made the effect seem natural combined with the woman dancing around the space of the frame. I identified with the camera lens showing the effortless joy of the woman doing her dance, and the fact that only the dress was in color made me see the purpose of the dance bringing the joy and life to the woman in the film.
"A Trip to the Moon" (1902) George Melies
ReplyDeleteThis film is shot entirely on a static wide-shot camera that makes it partially more reminiscent of a theater play than an actual movie. The focus is often more on the meticulously designed sets, with the actors moving about within them. Scenes are transitioned with either fade cuts to indicate time passing, or in direct cuts if it directly follows previous action. Interestingly, the only shot that defies the static camera is when it appears to be moving towards the "man in the moon". Not only does this allow the audience to become more invested in the action, becoming the lens itself rather than simply looking through it, but it also marks a subtle shift in production in the movie. This film was Melies showing off his cutting, and the Moon, a vast, alien fantasy landscape, works to incorporate the newer editing as part of the movie magic. Action scenes have swift frame-by-frame editing, combining both the distant wonder of theater fights and the benefits of a pre-made story to make villains explode in smoke when they are defeated. It's simple nature is charming in its way, particularly since unlike modern film, only the editing is used to the film's advantage. From the moment the moon is shown onward, the audience is truly able to identify with the lens.
"The Great Train Robbery" (1903) Edwin S Porter
While the film is shot only on wide shots that encompass the whole scene, it defies previous works in that it allows the scene to change to fit the flow of action, rather than just waiting until there's nothing else. The camera shifts to frame characters moving beyond it if necessary, and some scenes end before the actors leave the frame. The final shot is actually a close up of a cowboy actor that shoots directly into the camera and at the audience itself, possibly as a final huzzah before it ends. This film allows the director to guide, if only slightly, the audience's focus along with the camera instead of relying on them to understand scene by scene, and by extension allows them to fill what isn't explicit with what is implied. One of the posse that chases after the robbers gets off his horse at one point and moves to pick up a fallen corpse of a robber. The scene ends there, but because the audience can combine context clues they know he's probably going to hogtie the robber for a reward. And, because the audience is being relied upon to understand this themselves, they are that more invested in the action and are identifying further with the lens.
"The Kiss" (1896) Thomas Edison
This is a simple early short that captures an intimate moment between a man and a women. Shot using a single static shot of the couple in close-up with only lighting from the front, the simple moment of affection between the two is framed in a way that magnifies the intimacy of the two in the scene. This is similar to modern film in that it focuses on the intimacy with the kiss itself being in center frame, though it differs in that modern film would often move the camera in a veiled attempt to titillate the audience. Here, the audience can really relate to the camera lens because, whether intentional or not, the simple close framing of the two captures the humanity of the moment, inviting the audience into what would otherwise be a private occasion.
"Workers Leaving the Lumiere Factory"(1895) Lumiere Bros.
ReplyDeleteThe entirety of the footsge is a continuous long shot of well, workers leaving the factory. This is similar to modern film in presentation, just not in purpose. This shot in a modern film would be a set-up shot. Establish setting or a character entering/leaving a location. However, it wouldn't be the entirety of the entertainment, as it is here.
The Kiss (1896)
This was a short shot of a man and woman kissing each other after a brief second or two. It is very similar to current day film as it uses a close up for this. However, unlike most modern movies, the kiss is not overly-sexualized or fantasized, rather being an everyday ordinary kiss, which makes it just that much more endearing to watch, honestly.
"trip to the Moon" (1902)
Considering the entire 15 minutes is viewed from the same static position, it at first seems unnervingly astray from a movie I'd be familiar with. However, after seeing it, I noticed several familiar techniques, such as the closing in shot of the moon and the use of cross-fade to pass time, and it really became intriguing to see the similarity. I did affiliate with this camera, but in a distinct way I think made it worth mentioning: I felt like I was watching more of a play than a movie.
Le Monstre - George Melies
ReplyDeleteIn this roughly two minute long short film, Melies tells the story of a man who brings, summons, and controls a monster to show to a woman. I noticed that a very wide angled view was used throughout the whole film. This type of shot helps the viewer see everything that is going in the scene at once and it creates a sense of lots of space within the fore,middle, and background of the shot. The camera in this film was completely static. The cinematography of this film is very different to modern film because modern film for the most part uses multiple shots, with different perspectives, camera angles,and focal lengths. Modern film also utilizes moving cameras. I identified with the camera lens in this piece because the static camera and wide angled shot made me feel like I was there watching the action in a crowd. The one thing that is different between watching the action in person versus on film on the other hand, is that Melies was able to use cuts that were not obvious to make the monster do things that are not possible in real life such as turning from a skeleton, to a ghost to a girl. The viewer can’t see that another person most likely changed the outfits or switched out the skeletons behind the scenes.
Exercice de la Perruque/Exercise of Wig - Lumiere Brothers
In this short film there are two people who appear to be dancing and whipping their wig around. Similarly to Le Monstre, a wide angle shot was used and the camera was static. Although this film also used a wide angled view, there seemed to be less space because the two subjects took up a fairly large amount of the frame. Also, just like Le Monstre, I identified with the camera lens because it made me feel like i was in an audience watching a performance. I noticed that early short films were treated more like plays as opposed to today's. Today's movies are filmed in a way that makes you feel like you are literally inside the movies “world”, while early films make it seem like you're watching a performance from the outside.
Record of a Sneeze - Thomas Edison
In this very short (5 second long) kinetoscope film, the subject just sneezes. A static camera was used and so was a close up shot. Because of the close up shot, the subject takes up almost all of the frame, therefore there is a sense of very little space. The dark background also makes the shot seem like it has very little space. Since the camera was static, the viewer is unable to tell whether or not there was actually more space. This specific film differs from today’s mostly because of the action in frame instead of the cinematography. Films nowadays do not randomly highlight everyday actions or events in the way this film does or others such as the works leaving the Lumiere factory. Once again the camera lens makes me feel like I am onlooking a person's actions but unlike the first two films, because I can't see the subjects whole body, I don't feel like I am in an audience. Instead I feel like I am standing right in front of the subject, watching him sneeze.
"The Kiss"(1896) - Thomas Edison
ReplyDelete"The Kiss" is a film comprised of a single shot lasting less than thirty seconds. The shot is a close-up shot of a man and woman conversing flirtatiously, with the film concluding with a kiss. Even in this old, arguably primitive film, we can see techniques, such as camera angle and lighting, that contribute to the meaning of the film. For instance, the close-up camera angle furthers our focus on the man and woman, whom Edison wants to be the focal point of the film. As a result, we, the viewer, grow a deeper connection with the man and the woman, as if we are discovering a secret about them. In addition, this film’s lighting is used not only to center our focus on the man and woman, but also provide secrecy in what the man is saying. When the man is talking, the viewer can understand that the man is talking to the woman, but because his mustache provides a shadow over his face, the viewer has no insight into what the man is saying. Regardless of whether or not this was intentional, it does add depth to this short film. The fact that the man’s mouth is covered up seems to signify that the content of his conversation is taboo.
“A Trip to The Moon”(1902) - George Melies
The 1902 film “A Trip to The Moon” is a revolutionary work of art that was years, even decades ahead of its time. The twelve minute piece details a group of astronauts (or the 1902 equivalent) taking a rocket to the moon, discovering aliens, and then escaping from the aliens back to Earth. The majority of the shots are landscape shots that usually show a lot of space. This was common in early film, as film acting still shared much of its technique with theatrical acting, so the changing of scenes was similar to that of a play. The best work of this film, given the era in which it was made, was the editing, specifically the many types of cuts that Melies used. In many of the scenes, you can see a primitive form of stop motion editing, which, for example, was used to create the effect of an explosion. Fade in/outs would be used to indicate the passage of time. The cuts themselves are obvious, and you see about ¼ to ½ second of delay from one cut to the next, especially with the stop motion edits. Regardless, Melies using these techniques is one of the earliest examples of continuity editing, or editing with logical coherence.
“Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat”(1895) - Lumiere Brothers
The minute-long “Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat” is one of the first films to be shown in front of an audience. It is infamous for supposedly striking fear in the audience because they believed a train was in the room and was about to hit them. “Arrival” is one, continuous shot that shows a train station with passengers waiting to catch the incoming train. The Lumiere Brothers placed the camera near the end of the station, so that they could capture the train coming into the shot, as well as the front of the train leaving the shot. They knew that giving the illusion of a train coming directly towards the audience would create an interesting reaction, for better or worse. Even still, watching the train pass through the shot is fascinating to watch. It’s hard to look away, even if a passing train is not an unusual occurrence.
A Trip to The Moon (1902)-George Milies
ReplyDeleteThe film with the use of a stationary camera uses immensely detailed set pieces to immerse the audience in the short but vibrantly world the moon is perceived to be. Because of the camera being stationary instead of mobile the short contains no close-ups. To make up for this Milies uses landscape shots behind the characters. This differs from modern films because nowadays the camera is almost constantly moving. The filmmaker uses continuity editing and cuts to show creatures instantly turning into a cloud of smoke. Fade-in and Fade-outs are used to show the passage of time which is new to the film community during this time. The landscape of the rest of the moon is left to the imagination because of the deprived resources in film during the time and that film was a relatively new concept to people.
Arrival of a Train at La Ciotat (1895)-Lumiere Brothers
This film utilizes the camera's manipulation of space because of the subject of the film. The subject is the arrival of a train at a train station in France. During the beginning of film, projecting a moving picture was revolutionary to people. It is famously said that during the first viewing of the film the audience screamed in fear of a train inevitably hitting them. Landscape is left to the imagination because the 50 second film is only a close-up of the train pulling into the station. The audience is intended to identify with the camera lens because it shows what the average person who is waiting for the train sees. The camera, whether it was intentional or not is unknown, recorded the train at the height of the average person.
Frankenstein (1910)-Thomas Edison
For a movie that was created and released in 1910, advanced filming techniques can be found throughout this short. One is the close-up found when showing the letter to the audience. Another technique used is cutting between the growth of the monster and the scientist to show the passage of time. The most significant scene in the short is when Frankenstein looks into the mirror and sees his monster. He then disappears, through the use of a cut, into the mirror and the scientist comes back to witness this. He then rushes to the mirror but is tricked by the monster in the mirror disappearing. This is followed by a fade revealing the scientists reflection instead. There is no camera movement and no landscape shots. The audience identifies with the camera lens because when the scientist looks into the window into the chamber the camera shows the monster. The camera then cuts out to the outside of the chamber when the science looks away from the window.
”Card Party”(1886) - George Melies
ReplyDeleteCard Party is a simple film comprising of a single shot. The film focuses on three men smoking and drinking while playing a game on a table. While they play two women bring them items and talk to them at the table they are sitting at. The scene is shot by a static camera at medium distance with the men and props taking up the right of the shot. This differs from movies today because of the single shot and lack of close-ups or any other change in the shot. The film depicts a routine occurrence of playing a game outside and it reads as a casual event. I identify with the camera lense for that reason. What is left to the imagination is where these men are as it is not clear if they are in a park or just a backyard, also what game the men are playing is left a mystery.
“Buster’s Revenge on the Tramp” - Thomas Edison
Buster’s Revenge on the Tramp depicts a young boy’s attempt to sneak some jam to eat. He runs into the room and proceeds to tie a woman’s apron over her head. After not being able to reach the jam he calls in a man, the tramp, to help him. But soon seeks revenge on the man for eating his jam by calling his mom and his dog to chase the man away. The scene is shot at medium length with a static camera. Buster moves around the room and the shot but ends up being centered in the shot for the majority of the film.The film differs from ones today because of its lack of close ups. In an adaptation today Buster would have been featured closer up in his antics several times to illuminate his expression and doings of mischief, which did not happen during the film. the filmmakers compel the audience to see a mischievous boy getting into trouble. Nothing really is left out or left to the imagination due to the simplicity of the film. I identified with the camera lens because of the everyday simplicity of the film.
“Feeding the Baby”(1898) - Lumiere Brothers
Feeding the Baby features what can be assumed to be a family, a man, a woman, and a baby. The man and woman sit on either sides of the baby watching and feeding him. The film is taken with a static camera close up to the family. The film comprises a single shot with the family completely centered. Besides the obvious black and white silentness of the movie it is exactly like it would have been if it was shot today as there is no real need for close-ups or changes in perspective. Since the camera was at the distance and height of a person I identified with the lens since it felt like I was sitting at the table with the family. Because of the simple nature of the film nothing was left out or left to the imagination.
The Kiss (1896) Thomas Edison
ReplyDeleteThe presentation of cinematic space in this short film is conveyed through a closed frame. It is filmed in a single, static approximation of a medium shot with a simple black background, and the only light is being cast upon the actors’ faces. This is much unlike contemporary films, which utilize a variety of shot types in a multitude of shots that can vary in length. Also, much unlike its modern counterparts, this film’s duration is relatively exceptionally short, lasting only 25 seconds to our movies’ average runtime of two hours. The camera lens is identifiable to me, positioned at the eye level of the actors if I were to sit down across from them and watch the event of the kiss the director compels us to see intimately unfolding. What I must imagine for myself is the conversation taking place between the characters. Judging by their vivid facial expressions, the impression is that the man is affectionately chatting with, assumedly, his wife, and something that she says amuses him. What I now must decide is whether this snippet of the couple is a consistent representation of their overall relationship which is not shown in this short piece.
La Mer/The Sea (1895) The Lumière Brothers
Similarly to the first film I viewed by Edison, this short piece also was captured using a single, static shot. In contrast, the framing of the shot was very open, suggesting the endless expanse of an ocean landscape. This is more similar to a shot that might be found in films today; a long, or extreme long shot is captured to establish the setting and the actions occurring simultaneously within it. Once again, I find the camera lens easy to identify with because it is at the eye level of someone, perhaps a watchful parent, standing on the rocks that are visible at the lower right corner of the frame observing some kids jumping into the ocean—which the director compels us to observe. I can only imagine what circumstances brought the kids to this action in the first place, and what might happen next; the context is never revealed.
La Manoir du Diable/ The Haunted Castle (1896) George Méliès
In this 3 minutes, 17 seconds short film by Méliès, the framing is closed, but not nearly to the degree as in Edison’s short, by making use of the extreme long shot to establish a shallow if not discernable depth in this single static shot. However, this static image is more the equivalent of watching a play from one viewpoint, rather than a shot from a movie as we know them in present day. Because of this static shot, and the distance of the lens from the action, I find it harder to identify with the lens. I feel removed from the world of the film, more like a spectator than an active viewer becoming sucked into the comedic plotline taking place onscreen, devised by the director. I try to imagine how the soldier-like-characters must feel about these strange phenomena ensuing in the castle, how the vampire feels about causing them, or how the two soldiers even got to the castle in the first place—more unrevealed context to fill in with our own speculations.
Record of a Kiss - Thomas Edison
ReplyDeleteThe main focus of this terse film of four seconds narrows in on a man who sneezes. The shot is quite up close to the man's face and is relatively still. The camera does not move as much as the subject is as he is going through the motions of sneezing. There is not a wide sense of space provided in the shot because mostly what is seen is the man and the dark spaces behind him. This is quite different from film today because in modern days, filmmakers like to make great use of space and motion and have many things happening at once. In this film, there are not a lot of things happening at once and the main focus is on the man sneezing. I do identify with the camera lens because it is up close and I am able to see the man sneezing from an overall outside perspective.
The Haunted Castle - George Melies
In this 3 minute film, a magician is doing magic tricks and the viewer can see the tricks happening on the screen. The cinematic space occupies more of an outer view instead of a close up. The camera itself is relatively static and does not move much. The movement is mostly coming from the actions occurring in the actual scene. The filmmaker uses continuity editing to allow the magic tricks to look believable. This editing is still used in today's film. I do identify with the camera lens because the filmmaker aims to show the "magic" happening on the screen. The rest is left to the viewer's imagination such as how exactly the magic is happening.
The Dancing Skeletons - Lumiere Brothers
In this short 45 second film, the focus is on a skeleton who is "dancing". The filmmakers do not make much use of cinematic space. It is just an overall view and there are not any close ups present. The camera is static and the movement is mostly coming from the skeleton dancing. This differs from films today because filmmakers make more use of cinematic space and do more close ups and other types of shots. I do identify with the lens and the filmmaker allows you to see the skeleton is dancing but leaves how up to the viewer's imagination.