Choose 3 of the films we watched in class and answer the following questions. Answer all questions for each film to create at least 3 hearty paragraphs.
Le Retour a la Raison
Entr'acte
Le Ballet Mecanique
Un Chien Andalou
Meshes of the Afternoon (this is the one with the Maya Deren interview)
What do you notice about the film's presentation of cinematic space? What do you see on screen? For example, lots of landscapes or closeups? Moving or statics camera?
How does the director's use of lighting help to create meaning?
Do you identify with the camera's lens? What does the director compel you to see? What is left to your imagination? What does the director leave out altogether? Describe the mise-en-scene and how it helps to create meaning in the film.
What implicit meaning do you find in the film?
If you can't get enough of the avant garde cinema, check out this site: http://www.ubu.com/film/.
If you want to look more into Jonas Mekas, go here: http://jonasmekas.com/diary/
Man Ray’s short film “Le Retour a la Raison” (“The Return to Reason”) comes across as a literal experiment in the technical boundaries of cinematography and lighting. Ray takes a small amount of cinematic space and fills it with strange, abstract shapes and images. These shapes are presented exclusively in close-ups through a static camera and do not seem to be linked to one another, and each shot almost stands alone as its own creative concept. The “glue” that holds each of these shots together is the continuity in the lighting. The entirety of the film is shot in extremely high contrast lighting, with black, white, and the occasional shade of grey being the only colors present. Ray uses a lack of color to emphasize the simplicity of art and film and how said simplicity has been ignored in favor of (in the opinion of certain avant-garde artists and filmmakers) bloated, overly complex and distracting narratives.
ReplyDeleteCompared with “Le Retour a la Raison”, René Clair’s “Entr’acte” gives the audience more detailed images, greater variance in cinematic space, and some extremely loose narrative elements. However, “Entr’acte” still follows a path of experimentation. One of the most notable methods of experimentation was the overlaying of film to create dizzying, initially incoherent images. However, Clair, in doing this, is testing the idea that repetition in film (or music, poetry, or any combination of art forms) legitimizes otherwise obscure and impractical concepts. There is a shot in the film in which as many as five shots are stacked on top of each other, a dizzying display that, at first, seems confusing and arguably off-putting. The shot in question is presented in long takes, however, and is shown repeatedly throughout a period of roughly five minutes. The persistent presentation of this shot allows the audience to soak in the shot and gradually peal apart each layer, eventually rendering it coherent and arguably beautiful. Clair is clearly testing the limits of cinema and visual art in general.
Luis Buñuel and Salvador Dali’s “Un Chien Andalou” offers a film experience that is much more akin to a typical cinematic experience when juxtaposed with many other avant-garde films that we have studied. One notable departure for this film is the exploration of a relatively solid narrative. This affects the cinematography in a number of ways, including the greater usage of cinematic space (i.e. greater frequency in long shots for a variety of purposes, including as establishing shots). This film shares with the other avant-garde films the extreme usage of close-ups. Particularly, there are shots in which the primary male character has cornered the primary female character against a wall, groping her. Buñuel uses a variety of close-ups to portray the feeling of claustrophobia that consumes the female lead. The lighting of the majority of the film is of a dim quality, creating an environment rich with shadows, and much of the mise-en-scene compliments this environment. It appears that this is done to create suspense in numerous cases. Furthermore, Buñuel and Dali combine strange and sometimes ridiculous images with more conventional shot composition. For instance, there is a shot in which the male lead is attempting to reach the cornered female lead while simultaneously pulling two grand pianos (with a deer carcass upon each, no less). While this image is quite strange, it is juxtaposed by a sense of symmetry: the long shot that shows the male lead (with his back to the camera) pulling the two pianos follows the rule of thirds. As a whole, Buñuel and Dali are attempting to expose the male gaze and how men’s lust drives them insane.
Better Entr'Acte Video: Link
ReplyDeleteMan Ray's "Le Retour a la Raison" appears the most obtuse in its narrative, opting for a purely abstract and enigmatic approach to its film making. The camera remains static and squared in the entirety of the film, and the strange dreamlike closeups of moving silhouettes and eyeballs and strange crinkles gives the experience a sense of a myopic unreality. Certainly, when watching it I felt myself identify with the lens purely in desperation of finding something at all to identify with, as we are all subjected to the strange visions of the film in its entirety. Most of the shots appear to be silhouettes on 2-d planes, but in their few exceptions the shots are closed off and much the action is hidden. The spinning glowing lightbulbs imply a carousel, yet in the pitch of the shot noone can actually tell. The further focus on the black and whites of each shot, from the shadow of the shape to the strange curvatures of light on the woman's chest, seems to further the experience of going beyond the realms of possibility. The entire short appears to be an experiment with light, as light and dark images are frequently returned to with that same color scheme inverted, and the severe contrast of the colors may not only contribute to the overall atmosphere but also provide some insight into a possible theme in the duality in the nature of all things. It's possible the title, which translates to A Return to Reason, could have been a cheeky hint at the meaning of the film, being a sort of physical recreation of a person's stream of consciousness as they realize that not all things can be simplified into easily drawn conclusions, as all things possess the ability to hold darkness and light.
ReplyDeleteMaya Deren’s “Meshes of the Afternoon” follows a more definable narrative, but its presentation keeps it firmly in the realm of the abstract. Cinematic space is intertwined with the lens of the camera, as it utilizes the singular view to create an impossibly shifting and undefined world within the story. In several instances the movement of the camera is shown as having a direct effect on the world itself, as the protagonist stumbles and slides as though the world itself were shifting and the lens merely emulating it for the audience. Indeed, the camera is largely dynamic in the film, panning swiftly between rooms and movements to further illustrate the sheer incongruity of the world at large. Though the set itself appears to be fairly simplistic, the combination of strange, out of place props such as the telephone on the stairs or the key and the slow, ephemeral movement of the lens turns it into a truly dreamlike environment. Light is used once again as well, as the heavy contrast of light and shadow are borrowed from the German Expressionism and Noir movements that came before it. The shadows and reflections of the actors are given particular importance as well, as we are introduced to the shadow of the protagonist for nearly a minute before we even see her face, obscuring her possible intentions and misgivings from the audience. Furthermore, the mirror face of the death-like person is blinding in its light, and as he has some connection to the protagonist’s husband it may hint at an intrusive, guarded and domineering personality. In all this, the film may be portraying the repetitive regressive mindset of trying to get out of a tumultuous relationship that ultimately results in your own undoing.
I'm adding this separate because there's a character limit
ReplyDeleteFinally, Fernand Leger’s “Ballet Mecanique” is by far the most erratic and disjointed of the three films. Much like Man Ray’s film, the camera remains predominantly static to allow the images themselves to hold precedence, and once again closeups are used generously. Unlike Man Ray however, Leger allows the audience less time to consider the majority of the images as they oscillate between rapid cuts and brief pauses. Furthermore, the images are less abstract and artistic as they are purely warped, as objects appear scrambled in kaleidoscope-esque images and shots of people’s faces are closed in or cut off or made reverse. The few unedited shots of people run on uncanny loops to the point of unrecognizability, and the primary focus on machines makes this film less dreamlike as it does disturbingly inhuman.The lighting in this film isn’t nearly as heavily contrasted as the others, but it compensates by making the cuts jarring enough that the sudden brightness becomes immediately known. Several times in the film, people are depicted as mere shadows, reflections or fractions of themselves, juxtaposing their supposed inadequacies to those of the machines. I less identify with the camera lens as I am threatened by it, and I dare say this film is one of the few I’ve seen that wants to menace its audience. The jarring cuts, dehumanization of people, confused imagery and downright chilling music track-and I reference the music because its dissonant chords and erratic playing were composed specifically for this film-are all used to make this film completely alien to them. The film appears to be working as a sort of post-war anti-industrialization piece, a warning to the public the dangers of allowing machines to control their lives and leave them apathetic and redundant to society.
In Entr’Acte (1924), René Clair uses a combination of largely close-ups, contrasting lighting, and a surreal mise-en-scené created from natural settings to convey a consistent tempo of motion. Mostly static shots move into mostly mobile shots as the editing tempo picks up toward the end. There is a vague storyline about a sharpshooting man who gets shot off a building and the processional run after his coffin, which ends up in a field where he comes back to life and vanishes the people who find him and then himself. However, the real art is in Clair’s experimentation with superimposed shots, creating surreal images such as a man’s hair on fire and a boat sailing across the rooftops. He uses high-contrast lighting as well to highlight points of focus, making the white of the dancer’s skirt glow or the stark black of the men’s suits stand out against a light background. In addition to making things pop, Clair takes it a step further and uses mostly medium and close-up shots to create a very unique perspective and personal relationship for the audience with the subject of the shot. One example of this is when he focuses on the tip of a gun barrel creating a personal fear of looking into something that can kill you. The combination of these techniques works to construct a world of magical realism where things almost make sense but not quite, and I think it was Clair’s intention to leave the rest of the interpretation to the imagination.
ReplyDeleteUn Chien Andalou (Luis Buñuel, 1929) has more of a plotline than Entr’Acte, loosely following the story of a woman tormented by a strange man in what seems to be a surreal dream. Most of the scenes have a good balance between static and moving camera and are very close-framed to represent the woman feeling trapped by the man in her house. There is a lot of stuff in each room, cramping up the mise-en-scené, especially in the scene with the two pianos, the two dead animals, and the two pastors. The framing doesn’t open up until the man escapes from the strange surreality into the forest, and then again when the woman escapes with her boyfriend to the open-framed seaside. Throughout the first harrowing scenes, the lighting is very low-key with lots of highlights and shadows to emphasize the dread the woman—and therefore the audience, through the eye-level shots—is feeling. Once they make their escapes, the lighting brightens considerably to indicate they are out of the dark. What exactly they are coming out of—a shared dream, perhaps—remains up to the eye of the beholder.
Maya Deren’s Meshes of the Afternoon (1943) continues this dream-like quality with approximately three different levels of reality that all mesh together over the course of one afternoon. This film has the most cohesive storyline of the three, where a woman is haunted by her past selves, which possibly drives her to suicide depending on which version of reality you believe. The entirety of this film is very closed-framed, unlike the previous two films which ended with open frames. This could indicate that the ending of this film is much more open-ended since there is no bright happy ending. This film uses lots of close-up shots to limit the audience’s view of the bigger picture, and also unlike other films includes first-person shots, effectively placing the audience in the woman’s shoes. Combined with lots of moving camerawork, this creates the intimate dreamlike quality of the film. There is also tons of play with light and shadows, a common theme in all three films, but especially in this one. The woman’s dark clothing and light skin, the dark-cloaked mirror figure, and who we presume to be her husband all contribute to this starkly contrasting mise-en-scené. The white flower—symbolizing purity—is dropped somewhere along the way, indicating that this is a world with no clear-cut lines, other than those of the shadows and light. The different variations of reality all overlap with each other and it is never clear which one is real.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMeshes of the Afternoon (1943) relies on use of the same shots, repeated from different angles to create a confused, repeating timeline suggestive of a time loop. The space used is very open, leaving a lot of landscape open to view. This very much aids thelighting used in this video, which is dramatic and full of contrast. All of this is topped however by a camera that consistently jumps from host to host. This lens is non-associable, as it is more plot devvice than it is random.
ReplyDeleteSpace in Un Chien Andalou (1928) is a little tighter than Meshes. This creates the trapped atmosphere viewers feel empathetically for the protagonist as she deals witht the stranger. The lighting is used a little less specifically, except for in a few close-up shots. However, we do get to associate with the lens as a view point due to the fact it gives us an objecive, detailed view of the action and in some cases the thoughts of the characters.
Man Ray's Ballet Mecanique however is a whole new frontier. The shots are all very open, yet due to the uncontained and irrelevance to each other they still feel a little, almost.."tunnel visioned." The lighting is used to great effect here to show the contrast between shapes and sizes, showing one of the best markers of Avant Gargde simpy because it wmbodies pure experimentation. And the camera is an asscoiation point, since it is pretty much still all movie, as the rest instead changes around us, helping to fully immerse us in the work.
Avant-garde, or experimental film, is considered a cinematic genre in which cinematic conventions are bended and explored. It emerged through people who were mainly Dadaists and Surrealists in Europe during the 1920s. Meshes of the Afternoon, Un Chien Andalou, and Entr’acte are all well-known experimental short films. Meshes of the Afternoon, directed by Maya Deren, however, is different from the other two films mentioned because it has a much more present narrative. During the 14 minute film, a woman falls asleep after returning home and “dreams” of a hooded figure with a mirror as a face, a flower, a knife, and her own death. The line between her dream world and her real world is hazy, creating an almost hypnagogic atmosphere. All of the objects presented as part of the mise-en-scène, such as the mirror, knife, key, and telephone, are simple household objects. Although we come in contact with these things everyday, the context in which they are used begs many questions. For example, what is the meaning behind the cloaked person with a mirror where its face should be? Is it representative of the woman, the man, or neither? Why? Maya Deren leaves this up to the viewer to decide. Throughout the film’s duration, images of the objects like the key and the flower are repeated. Repetition of these things familiarize the audience with them. It influences the viewer to focus mainly on these objects and helps them to understand that they are important to the narrative and should eventually lead them to ask the question “why?” The cinematography in Meshes of the Afternoon is unique compared to other films of its time. In the beginning, though, it is incomplex and is mainly manipulated to establish a point of view, but as the film goes on, there’s an increased number of slow motion shots and extreme high and low angles. This jarring camerawork is especially prominent in the scenes where the woman is on the staircase. The shot angles create a feeling of uneasiness and also tie into the surrealist aspects of the film, being that in reality, the orientation of the stairs and the woman would be impossible. The lighting in Deren’s film remains mainly the same through its entirety; it is natural. The organic afternoon light is so straightforward that it feels somewhat unnerving. It assists in reinforcing the dream sequence. Since all in all the lighting does not change, it is therefore unclear what is happening in the woman’s dreams and what is happening in actuality. Because it is so abstract, many different meanings can be drawn from Meshes of the Afternoon. Personally, I believe that the film is about the continuous struggle to understand one’s own thoughts. The repetition of objects and images represent the woman attempting to make connections between the things in her life and the extreme low and high angle shots demonstrate her confusion and frustration as she tries to do so.
ReplyDeleteLuis Buñuel and Salvador Dalí’s Un Chien Andalou is unforgettable. Its mise-en-scène consists of elements of both surrealism and horror. Honestly, the short film doesn't make a lick of sense, but it isn't supposed to. Throughout the movie’s duration, there are many disturbing images. Ants crawl all over the hand of a pervert, who is trapped in a door. Rotting corpses of donkeys are stuffed in two grand pianos. The most shocking and well-known section of the film is actually an illusion where it appears to the audience that a woman’s eye is being sliced open with a straight razor. The sequence begins with a close up shot of the woman’s eye, held open by a man. He is holding the razor and moves it in a way so that it looks like he is about to slash open her eye. It then cuts to a shot of clouds passing by the moon. The moon resembles the eye of the woman and the movement of the clouds is similar to the movement of the straight razor in the previous shot. Following this, there is an extreme close up of the eye of an animal being sliced in two by a razor. The cinematography and editing used here gives the appearance that the woman’s eye is genuinely being cut open. The manner and arrangement of the props in Un Chien Andalou, such as the animal corpses and the bugs, is downright startling. The film’s original purpose was to shock and unnerve audiences, which it still does to this day. There is a wide range of shot types used in the film, from long shots to close ups. It creates the sense that there is a lot happening throughout the movie; it's chaotic. The range largely relates to the surrealist aspects of the piece because it makes it easier to influence the viewer’s focus, whether it be on the illogical martini shaker doorbell, the unnerving moth, or the bizarrely stuffed pianos. Un Chien Andalou, in terms of meaning and symbolism, leaves a lot to the imagination. In my opinion, the film compels the audience to find meaning in a meaningless world. What I gathered from my personal viewing is there's humor in the bizarre and nightmarish. The music is upbeat and brings to mind Charlie Chaplin flicks; that in combination with the strange images makes it a bit comical. The expressions on the faces of the actors are also a bit overdone and dramatic, which continues to creates sense of humor. The message altogether received is “don't take things too seriously.”
DeleteEntr’acte, directed by René Clair, has a very playful and lighthearted spirit. The film may appear serious at first glance because of the formal attire worn by the cast and the death-related elements in the movie, such as the funeral. But, the serious components are turned humorous with lively and exciting movements like running, dancing, and jumping. The cast was filled with surrealists and Dadaists, including René Clair himself, which showcased the critical avant-garde artists of the time. It makes the mise-en-scéne even more merry, showing that these big figures in art are just funny and absurd guys. Clair was able to dabble with cinematic perspective in his short film. Through the underside of a glass floor, a ballerina was filmed dancing. She leaps and spins, and because of the clear floor, it appears as though gravity has ceased to exist. There was also some experimentation involving pace. One famous shot shows a crowd running in slow motion. Both of these cinematic techniques accentuate the playful mise-en-scéne, making the film fun to watch because of the varying and entertaining types of motions. Entr’acte is similar, yet different, to Un Chien Andalou in terms of director’s intent. The two films are meant to shake up its spectators. However, Dalí and Buñuel wanted to unsettle their viewers, while Clair’s film is supposed to be silly and is much, much less morbid. To me, Entr’acte’s meaning is the fairly the same as my interpretation of Un Chien Andalou’s meaning. The universe is a ludicrous place, so try not to take life too seriously. Although, Entr’acte is not as forceful with this message, which ultimately makes its meaning more powerful. Avant-garde films put forth a type of cinematic magic which is unlike any other genres of film. It's almost completely up to the audience to derive meaning from films such as Meshes of the Afternoon, Un Chien Andalou, and Entr’acte. The viewer is able to see what they want to see and learn what they want to learn.
DeleteMan Ray's "Le Retour a la Raison" (1923) was a very experimental short film that, in my opinion, doesn't really have a narrative whatsoever. It was simply made to find out what the threshold for creativity was in film, if one thought "out-of-the-box" enough. As for the cinematic space in the film, there isn't very much of it. The shots, for the most part, were static, except for the one shot of the merry-go-round. Pretty much all of the shots were close-ups, or at least seemed to be even though the physical film strip might have been manipulated to make it appear that way. A few examples of shots that weren't close up were the naked woman near the window and the shadow art , they were both medium and medium-long shots, respectively. The director uses the lighting in really interesting ways, especially in the shots mentioned earlier. The lighting in the shadow art shot was stark in that there was a hanging art piece that had a spotlight, showing the shadow of the piece on the wall right behind it with both the artwork and the shadow in the same frame. The lighting in the shot with the naked woman was especially unique because there seemed to be some light coming through the blinds and onto the woman’s body creating a striped effect, but the curves on the woman’s body also made the lines curved, further distorting the light. Regarding the implicit meaning, I stand by my opinion that the film was simply made to experiment with film.
ReplyDeleteFernand Léger’s “Le Ballet Mécanique” (1924) uses cinematic space in a very chaotic and distorted way. Most of the shots are close ups of objects or of people's’ faces. The distorted aspect of the shots come from some of the shots having double vision, being upside down, or like a kaleidoscope view, seeing through multiple triangles on screen. There were also a few shots where the camera was looking at something through a reflection, like the shot of the camera filming itself via the reflection off of a shiny metal ball. In the film, a static camera was used for the majority of work, but there was still movement within the frame. The objects and people in the shot would move around in front of the camera instead of the camera moving around them; some of the shots were so close up that it was difficult to determine whether or not the camera was moving. Léger uses the lighting to create a very high contrast is most of the shots. The contrast is used to bring focus onto specific things in the shot, like bright light reflecting off a dark metallic machine to emphasize the machine or like the repeated shot of the woman with the dark lipstick to emphasize her lips and smile. The audience doesn’t exactly identify with the camera lens because it mainly consists of shots that could be considered unrealistic at time and flashing images of objects, like household items, or unexplained geometric shapes. Aside from that, there are two shots that actually provide an idea of what the film could be about in the beginning and the end. The shots of the woman on the swing and the same woman smelling the flowers are the easiest to identify with the camera lens on. These two shots could be used to find the implicit meaning of the film. Personally, I think that the woman in the beginning is at a park and the rest of the film could be a representation of her thoughts and emotions while she is there because the film presents as very chaotic and confusing, but still represents a sense of fun, with a couple shots of people at a carnival or fun event or the repeated shot of the woman smiling. And the very last shot of the woman smelling the flowers could be a conformation that is the rest of the film wasn’t exactly real life.If this shot hadn’t been there, the beginning shot wouldn’t be as significant and would be considered just as random as all of the other shots, making the implicit meaning significantly harder to analyze.
DeleteIn Luis Buñuel’s “Un Chien Andalou” (1929), the cinematic space seems to be very “by the book” compared to "Le Retour a la Raison" and “Le Ballet Mécanique” because in specific scenes the audience can see and understand exactly what’s happening; it might not make sense but it is still understood. Like when that man was standing in the room staring at his hand full of ants; we don’t know why he is holding ants, but it is made very clear that he is. Most of the shots in the film were more medium to medium close up shots, using a static camera, compared to the very few landscape shots and moving camera shots. A lot of low key lighting was used to make the scenes more dramatic. The lighting was also used to kind of show isolation; specifically the shot where the lighting on the woman dressed as a man, who found the hand on the ground, resembled a spotlight and then diffusing out on the rest of the crowd. The audience can tell that even though she is surrounded by a ton of people she still feels isolated or like the only one there. It can also indicate that she is only focused on herself and the severed hand that she’s poking at, nothing else matters to her at that moment. The audience does idetify with the camera lens because pretty much all of the camera angles used in the film present in a way that a human would be able to see in real life out of their own eyes; so watching the film feels a bit natural, in a way that you could get sucked in without noticing. In the very beginning, it isn’t exactly made clear of what the film is about and as the film went on, not all of the scenes that occurred were cohesive. Rather, only a few scenes at a time fit together creating more than one little narrative throughout the film. Towards the end of the film, it looks like a man is being murdered by another man, who happens to look exactly like him, assuming that the man is himself, you could say that he killed himself. Also when he was in the process of dying, the second man wasn’t present, indicating that it was in fact another part of himself that killed him. Also while he is dying, he is shown touching a woman’s back, the same woman whom he groped earlier in the film; indicating that she might’ve been his last thought before he died. The film ends with the woman moving on to another man and dying with him.
DeleteIn “Le Retour la Raison,” Man Ray uses a static camera and close-ups of random subjects as if to create a dream or vision like quality within the shots. Man Ray uses extremely bright light with a high concentration on most subjects to emphasize the contrast between the subjects of the shots and the backdrop. I do identify with the camera’s lens in this film. Man Ray’s use of the camera is mesmerizing, as it creates an almost impossible sense of familiarity with the subjects of the shots as if you have seen them before and are having memories/flashbacks. Man Ray seems to emphasize the importance of simplicity in film, during a time of increasing complexity in movies.
ReplyDeleteIn “Entr’acte,” there is a quite noticeable variation in the use of cinematic space, similar to “Un Chien Andalou.” There are some strange examples of framing and cuts, which create an uncomfortable feeling throughout the film.
In “Un Chien Andalou,” the use of cinematic space is much different than many other avant-garde films. Long shots are frequently used which is not particularly common. However, the use of close-ups is not forgotten, as they are also frequently used in combination with the long shots. The lighting in the film is generally quite dim, which is likely used to create suspense and an overall eerie tone. The camera’s lens is generally identifiable, as it is not extremely tailored to the viewer, but it creates a decent observation of the story.
In Le Retour a la Raison there is an interesting presentation of cinematic space. All of the shots in this film are static and most of the shots have very little depth. All movement in this film comes from what is being shown in frame. Man Ray shows the audience many different shapes and silhouettes. In this film, Ray takes advantage of lighting mainly by focusing on the shadows.
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning, shadows are used to show silhouettes of different shapes and in the final shots of the film, Ray uses shadows to cast shapes on the background of a wall and onto the body of a woman. I think that Man Ray created this film with an implied theme of chaos and disorder as the images on screen are very jarring and abstract due to the amount of movement and techniques such as double exposure.
Entr’acte was interesting because although there wasn’t really any apparent story, the film was interesting to look at visually due to the in camera effects that Rene Clair had used. Static shots are generally used in this film but Clair often plays around with the orientation of the frame in this film. As you watch the film, every once in awhile there will be shots that are either tilted or completely upside down. In Entr’acte, lighting is mainly used just to draw our eyes to the subject. In the scenes with the ballerina, the background is completely black while the ballerina is lit and dressed in white. This draws the viewer's eyes to the ballerina and the floral pattern created by the shape of the outfit. In this film the director also use effects such as iris-ing, slow motion, fast motion, jump cuts, and double exposure to create interesting on screen images.
I thought that Meshes of the Afternoon was one of the most interesting Avant Garde films that we watched in class. This film, unlike Le Retour a la Raison, uses a mixture of both static and moving shots. For the most part the framing of subjects in this film is open. In this film, the lighting, framing, and mise en scene play hand in hand and are a big part of what is portrayed on
Screen. First of all, this film has a very high contrast image. This is due to the director’s tendencies to put emphasis on not only the shadows, but with the costumes too. In this film the subjects are wearing black, which makes them stand out against the lighter set and as a result the audiences eyes are focused to them, or anything that is dark in general. The director also does an interesting thing with the framing. The camera is often initially looking at the shadow of the subject’s motions. This creates an interesting effect where it looks like were watching the movements of the shadows but this gets interrupted when the actual subject appears and interacts with the shadows that have been created. Due to this effect, I think this film has a theme of appearance vs reality.
In Man Ray’s Le Retour a la Raison, the cinematic space presented is quite abstract in its own fashion and indefinite. He utilizes the small space provided and expands it through the use of abstract objects and images. Most of the objects pictured on screen do not imply a greater meaning or add onto the “narrative” in this film. Having said that, it is to be noted that the plot and narrative of this film are almost nonexistent and instead, the film is spun through a series of images that distort the viewer’s perception. The flow of changing images is almost hypnotic in a sense and provide a sense of disorient and confusion for the audience. Many of the same images appear to be “flickering” or rapidly repeating in a way that allows the images to appear animated. Some say that this method of film editing could potentially be considered the first kind of “special effects”. There is also a stark contrast between light and dark that is emphasized in this film. Black, white, and the grey in between are the sole colors that are presented in this film. High contrast lighting is utilized for majority of this film. There are also sequences of shots that are repeated, the only difference being the lighting and contrast. For example, initially, the clock and nails are presented in a positive space with a white background and black subject (ie: clock and nails). However, immediately after that sequence, the same images are being presented except for in a different lighting. This time, the subject matter are presented in white with the stark contrast of the black background being emphasized. This experimental inversion is quite important in the fact that it potentially implies a greater theme and meaning. Although there is no distinct narrative or plot in this experiment, the use of inverted lighting and the hypnotic repetition of images suggest that there is perhaps a larger ambiguity to life that is often ignored by the general population. The repetition of images in an inverted manner depicts the duality of life and how everything may not be as it seems. Nature has a way of presenting itself in many different ways and the elements of light and darkness is within all things and can be presented in any manner.
ReplyDeleteFernand Leger’s Le Ballet Mecanique is relatively more disorienting and confusing for the audience due to its use of close ups and almost unrecognizable images. While Ray used very stark black and white contrast in his film, Leger delves more into the warm, sepia lighting contrasted with a “duskier” black. While most of the film featured static camera, the objects in focus were in constant motion. Leger plays with both light and angles in this experiment. The recurring image of the mouth going from a smile to a frown was able to compel a sense of intrigue. Leger also plays with a kaleidoscope effect to alter the images and make them more interesting to the viewer. At the same time, it is disorienting and confusing for the reader to understand its true meaning. The shot of an elderly woman climbing steps was repeated multiple times in a row in a manner which is hard to understand. The filmmaker's intent is more difficult to dissect with these “random” sequences of images. Nearing the end of the film, a kaleidoscope like effect relieves the curiosity of the woman whose smile occupies so much attention in the beginning and the rest of her face is revealed. While there was not a distinct plot like in Man Ray’s film, this film portrayed more of a story. The majority of images were not mere projections. Along with that, in contrast to Ray’s experiment, this film presents humans and this portrayal of human emotion allows the viewer to connect in a more human way and react based on the actions of the humans. The implicit meaning of this film could involve the complexities of the human mind. The film begins with a woman in a park and transitions to close ups of her smile. Then, a sequence of almost machine-like images are shown. This could be a metaphor onto the things that go on in our minds and show the complicated brain mechanisms that operate within it.
DeleteOut of the two aforementioned films, Un Chien Andalou is probably the most orthodox film. Like in Le Ballet Mecanique, humans are featured in this experiment. However, these people are participating in activities and actually doing things and there is a semblance to a narrative in play that is not in the other two films. There is a mix of establishing shots and close-ups and each section seems understandable on its own. The mixture of shots, from different angles all the way to point-of-view shots allow the viewer to identify with the camera in a way that is not often possible in these experimental films The meaning of the story is completely left to the viewer's imagination through the infinite possible interpretations of this film. The implicit meaning could be about basic human interactions and the role of dreams or the subconscious in these interactions. Generally, the camera is static in this film when something is taking place, but the camera starts to move in order to follow someone’s movements. The costumes and the scenes also seem normal except for a shocking element part of the mise en scene in which the stark difference is emphasized as its placement does not quite make sense. This causes a dreamlike feel to this film.
Delete