I have noticed that it is getting difficult to decide on what to watch.
I spend so much time at our local DVD shop to rent a movie going through many movies, but nothing seems to be that much interesting to me. Some movies are so depressing, some are so lame, some are so predictable...
So, I am open for recommendations.
I really missed watching French movies for instance, any ideas?
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Friday, July 16, 2010
Eclipse, It Was!
And a total eclipse it was!Darkness hovered all around which made it unbearable by the minute. It was not like I was expecting much from this third part of the Twilight Saga anyways. It never quite caught my interest. But hearing all the hype and being surrounded by some ardent fans, I basically gave in to watching this movie. & I thought why not give it a chance, it definitely would be an awesome experience to watch a vampire movie in Transylvania out of all places! The land of Vlad the Dracula ( maybe a distant cousins of the vampires). Well to me, Vampires or Draculas, what difference does it make, they're all the same... & Yes we did get to see a Romanian flag in the movie, rightly and proudly pointed by my brother :) Coming back to the movie, I think it is blatantly clear that acting is poor. I know it is supposedly this heartfelt love story between Bella and Edward, but I fail to see any spark there or the reason for the sexual tension between Bella and Werewolf boy! Nothing makes sense, even Bella's apparent confusion between vampire Edward or werewolf Jacob!! I thought she was madly in loooveee with Edward and that was the basis of the movie. Apparently noooot, coz she's all messed up in the head!! The movie is so slooowwwww, and too predictable, it leaves no room for the activation of our neurones! I have to say I don't understand why The Twilight Saga has become such a huge success, why were the cast on Oprah, why are there fan following all around the world! It just makes no sense, when u have a beau Ian Somerhalder in Vampire Diaries(verging on cheese here, but I can;t help it)! Anyways I don't think it is worth analysing in detail, coz there is not much that can be said. If I may say, I think Vlad would have been very disapponited!
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Making it Visible
With Şeyda we are back in Turkey.
Quite difficult not to miss our life in Sweden.
We hope that movies will be a bit helpful.
Soooooooooo, as we used to do, I dropped by our favorite DVD shop 'Filim Hakan' which unexpectedly from a local shop, has a wide spectrum of movies.
To be honest, I dont like downloading movies; might sound a bit stupid for some though. I like spending time in the shop, going through the movies, talking to the owner, getting his opinions, and listening to mostly quite stupid comments of the other customers :) way too enjoying than waiting for the downloading status to get 100%.
Anyways, after spending 20 minutes I rented the movie 'Dark Blue Almost Black' by Daniel Sánchez Arévalo.
Great movie! The story, acting, and the pictures...So natural and so real. Loved it, but was soooo heavy for us, as in some ways very similar to what we have been experiencing in the last years. It is about the struggle of a 25-year-old boy trying to find a way out from his life which somehow he got stucked with but not like escaping I think, rather trying to get what he had aimed and worked for so that things would change into a more positive direction.
After the movie, we talked with Şeyda how cinema is powerful in making things visible. For instance, I have noticed that in general when I talk with people about how hard it is with mom's situation and all neither I am good at telling it well nor they are good at feeling it. But a movie can do that. It locks the audience to the story with visuals, narration, and the audio. As the audience you are an outsider but still very much like an insider. Sometimes it introduces you sth. new and sometimes it just makes sth you havent noticed, although you should have, visible.
May be we should try to find the movies that tells what we want to tell and make others watch that, might be easier than trying to tell it ourselves.
Quite difficult not to miss our life in Sweden.
We hope that movies will be a bit helpful.
Soooooooooo, as we used to do, I dropped by our favorite DVD shop 'Filim Hakan' which unexpectedly from a local shop, has a wide spectrum of movies.
To be honest, I dont like downloading movies; might sound a bit stupid for some though. I like spending time in the shop, going through the movies, talking to the owner, getting his opinions, and listening to mostly quite stupid comments of the other customers :) way too enjoying than waiting for the downloading status to get 100%.
Anyways, after spending 20 minutes I rented the movie 'Dark Blue Almost Black' by Daniel Sánchez Arévalo.
Great movie! The story, acting, and the pictures...So natural and so real. Loved it, but was soooo heavy for us, as in some ways very similar to what we have been experiencing in the last years. It is about the struggle of a 25-year-old boy trying to find a way out from his life which somehow he got stucked with but not like escaping I think, rather trying to get what he had aimed and worked for so that things would change into a more positive direction.
After the movie, we talked with Şeyda how cinema is powerful in making things visible. For instance, I have noticed that in general when I talk with people about how hard it is with mom's situation and all neither I am good at telling it well nor they are good at feeling it. But a movie can do that. It locks the audience to the story with visuals, narration, and the audio. As the audience you are an outsider but still very much like an insider. Sometimes it introduces you sth. new and sometimes it just makes sth you havent noticed, although you should have, visible.
May be we should try to find the movies that tells what we want to tell and make others watch that, might be easier than trying to tell it ourselves.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
An 'Alice in Wonderland' Experience
I have just seen the movie Alice in Wonderland by Tim Burton. It was a surprising decision for me since I really dont like the whole Alice in Wonderland story, mainly because of the memories I have in mind from my childhood when I watched I guess a Disney version cartoon movie of it. I think I have never read the story. All I remember from that cartoon is the annoying feeling, the struggle, and the play cards. I was so annoyed that I for some time hated play cards as well :)
Anyways, just to integrate with friends I decided to see it, and after all it was by Tim Burton and Depp was in it, olalala :) As always I had some expectations from the movie, but unfortunately kind of disappointed. I think, if you are making a movie about a known story you should bring something extraordinary with the whole audio-visual elements like the music, costumes, scenes, characters,etc. However, in the movie, although there were some original designs, overall you dont experience a very surprising and memorable visual experience. Moreover, some decisions seem to be made just for the sake of originality without a meaning behind. For instance, there were two queens, and I really hated the design of the white queen. Everything was so conventional about her, white princess kind of dress, the castle and all, the movements of her arms, the way she talks, etc. But she had very dark lipstick and fingernails, almost black. It looked so ugly, and no white queen effect which was supposed to represent the good. Why? Was it the only element that they could bring some kind of an edge? Apart from the visual stuff, I think the movie lacked a fun approach. It was quite dull. Neither the dialogues nor the choreography was good enough to make the experience fun. Of course it doesnt have to, but then it becomes dull :) The audio elements were not strong as well at least for me that I dont remember any melody :) I just remember that there was kind of a modern music, I mean from this time that doesnt really match with the story, which created a contrast and become memorable.
About the actors, I wasnt that impressed as well. First of all, Alice was such a boring girl, i think she doesnt have the 'it' factor that makes you want to watch her act regardless from the role. For Depp, I think I am kind of bored of seeing him play these kinds of characters, you can see some same elements among all them, so the originality of his acting starts to fade away. I think he should start playing normal humans again so that he can refresh himself. yes Depp, you should take my advice, I am such an expert after all :) But I loved the caterpillar, Alan Rickman, I love how he talks.
What else? Hımmm. A few comments about the cinema design. We had to watch the movie from the second row, which left a neck pain, because it is sooooo close to the screen. It is surprising that there are no standards accepted for cinema design to create a better, ergonomic experience to the audience. Don't they know that it is soo close? Why do they keep placing seats to 1 meter away from the screen. I think it is not humanitarian. In architectural decisions there are so many regulations, and there should be one for this as well.
Anyways, just to integrate with friends I decided to see it, and after all it was by Tim Burton and Depp was in it, olalala :) As always I had some expectations from the movie, but unfortunately kind of disappointed. I think, if you are making a movie about a known story you should bring something extraordinary with the whole audio-visual elements like the music, costumes, scenes, characters,etc. However, in the movie, although there were some original designs, overall you dont experience a very surprising and memorable visual experience. Moreover, some decisions seem to be made just for the sake of originality without a meaning behind. For instance, there were two queens, and I really hated the design of the white queen. Everything was so conventional about her, white princess kind of dress, the castle and all, the movements of her arms, the way she talks, etc. But she had very dark lipstick and fingernails, almost black. It looked so ugly, and no white queen effect which was supposed to represent the good. Why? Was it the only element that they could bring some kind of an edge? Apart from the visual stuff, I think the movie lacked a fun approach. It was quite dull. Neither the dialogues nor the choreography was good enough to make the experience fun. Of course it doesnt have to, but then it becomes dull :) The audio elements were not strong as well at least for me that I dont remember any melody :) I just remember that there was kind of a modern music, I mean from this time that doesnt really match with the story, which created a contrast and become memorable.
About the actors, I wasnt that impressed as well. First of all, Alice was such a boring girl, i think she doesnt have the 'it' factor that makes you want to watch her act regardless from the role. For Depp, I think I am kind of bored of seeing him play these kinds of characters, you can see some same elements among all them, so the originality of his acting starts to fade away. I think he should start playing normal humans again so that he can refresh himself. yes Depp, you should take my advice, I am such an expert after all :) But I loved the caterpillar, Alan Rickman, I love how he talks.
What else? Hımmm. A few comments about the cinema design. We had to watch the movie from the second row, which left a neck pain, because it is sooooo close to the screen. It is surprising that there are no standards accepted for cinema design to create a better, ergonomic experience to the audience. Don't they know that it is soo close? Why do they keep placing seats to 1 meter away from the screen. I think it is not humanitarian. In architectural decisions there are so many regulations, and there should be one for this as well.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Audio-visual Aspects of ‘The Graduate’
I like paying attention to sound in films. I guess sound is the key element for me to immerse myself in films and therefore, I like seeing movies at the movie theatres because I can experience sound better. In this paper mainly two scenes- the opening and the ending scene- from The Graduate, directed by Mike Nichols in 1967, will be analysed in terms of their sounds. It will be focussed on the functions of the sound in the selected scenes.
The graduate‘s screenplay was written by Calder Willinghom and Buck Henry. As I mentioned before it was directed by Mike Nichols in 1967. Larsen also discusses this movie in his book Film Music. Actually he is the reason why I grew interest in this movie. I haven’t seen the movie till I read about it in Larsen’s book. I found the discussion interesting and decided to watch and then write about the movie. I wondered about my observations. The movie is based on Ban Braddok or Benjamin’s experiences after he is back from collage with a bachelor’s degree. He is twenty one years old, insecure and very confused about his future. The opening scene must be analysed briefly because it is important for the analysis of the sound of the movie in general and also in the ending scene. It starts with a close up view to Benjamin’s face. His face looks expressionless and motionless. At the same time, we hear the engine sounds or noise and then a man talks and informs people that they are about to land to Los Angeles so the audience understands that he is on the plane and arriving at Los Angeles. As the man continues to talk the camera zooms out and allows us to see Benjamin among the other passengers. It is kind of surprising to see the other people all of a sudden because in the opening seen he looks so isolated and alone. This feeling was created by both the close up shot and his empty expression and also the white cover of the seat. The cover of the seat gives the spectator no clue about the environment and supports the neuter empty look. It looks like just a white background to a photograph. So you never expect to see many other people surrounding him in the following scene. Whole scene combined with the following one, gives the impression of his alienation. He looks so lonely and isolated although, he is sitting with many other people in a plane. There seems to be no communication among them. The man welcomes the passenger to LA and we move to another seen, where Benjamin is seen walking, so the spectator assumes that he is walking in the airport trying to leave the airport. As this scene starts also a song, ‘the Sound of Silence’ written by Paul Simon and performed by Simon and Garfunkel, starts to accompany. He then takes the speedwalk, stands very still. Meanwhile the song is still playing and sort of it associates itself with Benjamin. The whole opening scene introduces us Benjamin. He is always alone in the scenes (other than a bit of plane scene) and very much in the focus. All background is very plain supporting him as a focal point and the song has a clear association with him. The viewer thinks that this is his song. The song could refer to his inner thoughts or it may refer to his situation or his mood and in this sense, the song may be an external comment. But no matter what, the song has some sort of association with him. During that scene the title of the movie, the director’s and crew’s names appear on the scene. What I find interesting is the appearance of the song writer’s and performers’ name in this scene very clearly as if they really want the audience to notice the song writer and the performers. This could be related to marketing of the movie because promoting the movie by pop and rock songs of the time was common in 1960s (Larsen, 146). At this point, to give some information about the developments in the film industry in 1950s and 1960s is necessary to understand the character of The Graduate’s music. In 1950s, TV gained great popularity and became a rival to cinema (Larsen, 150, Wierzbicki, 160, 161). People preferred to stay home and watched their TV instead of going to the cinemas. As a result of this, the movie industry tried to regain the audience by new technological innovations or big productions. But the industry couldn’t bring the audience back to the movie theatres but it took youngsters’ attention this time (Larsen, 150). So, to have them, movie makers started to use pop and rock songs in the movies. This became extremely popular in 1960s and even Hitchcock wanted to try this and fired his previous composer Herrmann (Larsen, 146). So, one can say that 1960s Hollywood films targeted teenagers and youth culture (Larsen, 149, 150). Also related to these developments in this period sound tracks became important and were started to be considered as independent products as well. They can both promote the movie and also be sold out separately. The graduate was made in 1967 and the soundtrack was released in 1968 and topped the lists. The Graduate is obviously part of this trend of 60s film industry and it must be analysed having these information in mind.
Having said all these, I will return to the opening scene. Then he leaves the airport and the scene changes but the song continues and combines the scenes, so the music has a formal function here. When the song ends with the words; ‘…. the sound of silence’ at the same time the viewer sees his face close up and again alone and frozen in front of an aquarium. So in this scene are there any associations between the words and Benjamin’s silent, worried and frozen look? I am not sure and I think no one is sure. Larsen before discussing the song’s relation to the movie he gives the following title; ‘Difficult Songs: The Graduate, 1967’ (Larsen, 151). The reason for that is the song is not originally composed by this movie. The director wants to hire Simon and Garfunkel. But the songs written by Simon are rejected by the director and Simon can’t compose new songs on time. Therefore, the director uses the old songs as temp track during the editing process. He likes it and decides to keep it. So other than ‘Mrs. Robinsson’, none of the songs were written for the movie. Also, the reason, the director hired Simon and Garfunkel, was he imagined Benjamin character as someone who listens to Simon and Garfunkel (Larsen, 152). Larsen calls this song as a problem because it is crucial in the discussion about the use of music with lyrics in the movie. Many questions can be raised for the sake of this discussion such as; are the lyrics relevant to the images or what is going on in the scene?, or do they refer to character’s inner thoughts?, are they adding something to the scene or narration in general?... While theorists are already struggling with these questions they are facing this song which is sort of accidently selected or if it is put in another way, they weren’t written with this movie in mind. Larsen also mentions that the only song written for this movie is Mrs. Robinson and the only common feature between the song and the character is the name. I will continue to this discussion after analysing the final scene. Also I want to repeat that the reason I additionally discussed the opening scene is, the same song, which is very much associated with Benjamin, appears in several scenes as well as in the ending scene. This association is introduced in the beginning.
In the final scene he leaves the car. As the cars stops the music stops as well. But diegetic sounds still can be heard such as the sounds of the passing cars and the sounds produced by him. He starts to run. We hear the sound of his steps and the traffic and so on. As he arrives to the church we hear a chord played by a guitar. The chord is nervous in terms of character. It is a dominant chord which creates excitement and asks a question; what happened in the church or what will happen? Then the second chord comes as he arrives at the door and tries to get in. In terms of character it is similar to the first one. Then the third chord is heard as he decides to find another way to get in to the church and takes the stairs. The forth chord comes when he finally gets in through a door and then we hear the fifth one when he arrives at a big glass wall, where he can see the bride and the groom who are about to kiss. The first chord is really intense as he goes into the church, the chords get softer and resolve but still they all sound sad not happy. He sees them already married and kissing each other. He fails. He says ‘oh Jessus…’ Then the church organ player starts to play the wedding march. It sounds very annoying, irritating, and camera shows him standing against the enormous glass wall, disappointed and miserable. To me he looks sacrificed or crucified like Jesus especially with the annoying and in a way scary church music. In these scenes guitar is associated with Benjamin and humanistic feelings such as love and especially their love. It is also associated with being naïve, being young. Benjamin and Elaine are not like their parents and they don’t fit to the society that their parents belong, which is pretty fake. On the other hand, the church organ and church music is associated with that fake society and evil. Elaine’s father, Mrs. Robinson, and their pretentious friends they are all in the church and act like they are all so decent. They witness Elaine’s wedding ceremony. Elaine is like a sacrificial animal as well. So, on the aisles there are fake and evil people. On the altar Elaine captured by those people and the church and the church music. Benjamin is across Elaine facing her from the behind but outside of the church. They don’t listen to what Benjamin listens. But on the other hand, Benjamin is outside of the church and the music associated with his adventures is played by a guitar. So guitar music is outside of the church. Guitar music is not scary and not irritating. It is naïve. Then he screams her name dramatically and hits the glass, while the church music is still playing. He takes the attention from both Elaine and the others. When the camera shows her we hear Benjamin’s voice from the distance because he is outside and also we hear the other people talking, mumbling. Then camera shows her parent’s reaction and the sound focuses on what they are saying. She walks towards him in the church. As she walks the viewer sees her close up and the talking sounds become blurring, turn into mumbles. Then she looks around, surrounded by angry people who are all saying something, yelling but they are not heard. We see these form her point of view. They are muted but Benjamin can be heard he still screams her name and hits the glass. So, he is the one for her that’s why he is not muted. Finally, she screams his name very dramatically as well. As soon as he hears her, he starts running to meet her. He is stopped by her father. They start to fight. Then the crowd arrives and joins the fight. We don’t hear any songs any more but diegetic sounds such as screams, steps, mumbles and clear dialogues, the sound of the fight and so on. It makes the scene more dramatic I think. Finally, Benjamin grabs the cross and avoids the crowd, rescues Elaine and they together leave the church. He locks everyone in the church with the cross, creates an ironic scene. They together run away and again all we hear is diegetic sound of the steps and the sound of the crowd fading away at the background, the traffic and so on. A bus arrives immediately and they get in the buss. The passengers are surprised by the couple’s entrance. They move to the back, while the sound of the engine is really so dominant, which creates a space. It really locates us in the buss. They sit down on the back seat, look back out the window, turn back and settle down. He laughs. They look each other and smile and look towards us. The close up shot to their faces is very similar to the ones previously done through the movie to Benjamin when he is alone. But now he is with this woman. He doesn’t look that much alienated or I can say now they are together alienated from the rest. But they are together. There is a slight smile on their faces. The expression of Benjamin’s is not as empty as before. And again the same song; ‘The Sound of Silence’, which always plays when he is alone, starts but this time he is not alone. But when we hear the music the characters’ expressions change slightly. They keep smiling and stop smiling for a while but finally the smile vanishes and is replaced by a bit worried or confused expression. Benjamin always looks toward us as he always does when this song plays. But she looks at around and especially at him. Again alienation, even between the lovers, can be observed. Scene changes and we see the bus form outside; from the behind. We watch them leave but the music continues and combines the scenes-again. It has a formal function as it has before several times through the movie. The film ends, the main characters’ names are appeared on a black background but the song still continues.
So Larsen thinks since the music is not composed for the movie there is no real connection between the lyrics and the narration. He also discusses in chapter 10 that when we see images with music even though there is no relation we want to create some sort of relation or we search for it and usually we create a meaning. He says we find metaphors (Larsen, Chapter 10*). I think he is right and Cook, in his book Analysing Musical Media, suggests using metaphor model to analyze audio-visual culture. Actually I read the lyrics and try to understand the relevance to Benjamin character to understand the function of the song. Is the song represent Benjamin’s thought or is it an external comment to him or to the scene in general? Actually I couldn’t find a very direct relation with the narration or his mind. According to Berliner’s and Furia’s theory, which claims, the song represents Benjamin’s thoughts and it always functions like that through the movie (Larsen, 154). I disagree so as Larsen. The lyrics are more critical to the society then Benjamin character. Benjamin is 21 year old and very confused young man. Although, he feels alienated and naïve and in a way decent than the people he is surrounded by, I don’t think he is as intellectual or mature as to make those critics done by the song. In my opinion, the song refers to his alienation and his loneliness, his confusion. So, yes, it has an emotional function. But also it makes a general and external comment both to the specific scene and the movie in general. I think the song is not in his mind. He can’t hear the song; he is far away from the song. Larsen also discusses the lyrics, its association with the narration and Benjamin’s mind. Other than couple of tiny instances, which are like coincidences there is no direct connection, he thinks, which I agree (Larsen, 154, 155, 156, 157). But on the other hand, in terms of external comment that the song made, I can say it fits nicely to the film in general. Such as the critic of the society or Benjamin’s and people’s alienation, his emotions, the critics of the church, etc. In addition to these, the song has a formal function; it perfectly combines different scenes.
Bibliography
Bordwell, David and Thompson, Kristin, Film Art; An Introduction. NY: Mc Grow Hill, 2008.
Cook, Nicholas, Analyzing Musical Multimedia. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
James Eugene Wirezbicki, Film Music: A History. NY: Routledge, 2009.
Larsen, Peter, Film Music. London: Reaktion, 2007.
The graduate‘s screenplay was written by Calder Willinghom and Buck Henry. As I mentioned before it was directed by Mike Nichols in 1967. Larsen also discusses this movie in his book Film Music. Actually he is the reason why I grew interest in this movie. I haven’t seen the movie till I read about it in Larsen’s book. I found the discussion interesting and decided to watch and then write about the movie. I wondered about my observations. The movie is based on Ban Braddok or Benjamin’s experiences after he is back from collage with a bachelor’s degree. He is twenty one years old, insecure and very confused about his future. The opening scene must be analysed briefly because it is important for the analysis of the sound of the movie in general and also in the ending scene. It starts with a close up view to Benjamin’s face. His face looks expressionless and motionless. At the same time, we hear the engine sounds or noise and then a man talks and informs people that they are about to land to Los Angeles so the audience understands that he is on the plane and arriving at Los Angeles. As the man continues to talk the camera zooms out and allows us to see Benjamin among the other passengers. It is kind of surprising to see the other people all of a sudden because in the opening seen he looks so isolated and alone. This feeling was created by both the close up shot and his empty expression and also the white cover of the seat. The cover of the seat gives the spectator no clue about the environment and supports the neuter empty look. It looks like just a white background to a photograph. So you never expect to see many other people surrounding him in the following scene. Whole scene combined with the following one, gives the impression of his alienation. He looks so lonely and isolated although, he is sitting with many other people in a plane. There seems to be no communication among them. The man welcomes the passenger to LA and we move to another seen, where Benjamin is seen walking, so the spectator assumes that he is walking in the airport trying to leave the airport. As this scene starts also a song, ‘the Sound of Silence’ written by Paul Simon and performed by Simon and Garfunkel, starts to accompany. He then takes the speedwalk, stands very still. Meanwhile the song is still playing and sort of it associates itself with Benjamin. The whole opening scene introduces us Benjamin. He is always alone in the scenes (other than a bit of plane scene) and very much in the focus. All background is very plain supporting him as a focal point and the song has a clear association with him. The viewer thinks that this is his song. The song could refer to his inner thoughts or it may refer to his situation or his mood and in this sense, the song may be an external comment. But no matter what, the song has some sort of association with him. During that scene the title of the movie, the director’s and crew’s names appear on the scene. What I find interesting is the appearance of the song writer’s and performers’ name in this scene very clearly as if they really want the audience to notice the song writer and the performers. This could be related to marketing of the movie because promoting the movie by pop and rock songs of the time was common in 1960s (Larsen, 146). At this point, to give some information about the developments in the film industry in 1950s and 1960s is necessary to understand the character of The Graduate’s music. In 1950s, TV gained great popularity and became a rival to cinema (Larsen, 150, Wierzbicki, 160, 161). People preferred to stay home and watched their TV instead of going to the cinemas. As a result of this, the movie industry tried to regain the audience by new technological innovations or big productions. But the industry couldn’t bring the audience back to the movie theatres but it took youngsters’ attention this time (Larsen, 150). So, to have them, movie makers started to use pop and rock songs in the movies. This became extremely popular in 1960s and even Hitchcock wanted to try this and fired his previous composer Herrmann (Larsen, 146). So, one can say that 1960s Hollywood films targeted teenagers and youth culture (Larsen, 149, 150). Also related to these developments in this period sound tracks became important and were started to be considered as independent products as well. They can both promote the movie and also be sold out separately. The graduate was made in 1967 and the soundtrack was released in 1968 and topped the lists. The Graduate is obviously part of this trend of 60s film industry and it must be analysed having these information in mind.
Having said all these, I will return to the opening scene. Then he leaves the airport and the scene changes but the song continues and combines the scenes, so the music has a formal function here. When the song ends with the words; ‘…. the sound of silence’ at the same time the viewer sees his face close up and again alone and frozen in front of an aquarium. So in this scene are there any associations between the words and Benjamin’s silent, worried and frozen look? I am not sure and I think no one is sure. Larsen before discussing the song’s relation to the movie he gives the following title; ‘Difficult Songs: The Graduate, 1967’ (Larsen, 151). The reason for that is the song is not originally composed by this movie. The director wants to hire Simon and Garfunkel. But the songs written by Simon are rejected by the director and Simon can’t compose new songs on time. Therefore, the director uses the old songs as temp track during the editing process. He likes it and decides to keep it. So other than ‘Mrs. Robinsson’, none of the songs were written for the movie. Also, the reason, the director hired Simon and Garfunkel, was he imagined Benjamin character as someone who listens to Simon and Garfunkel (Larsen, 152). Larsen calls this song as a problem because it is crucial in the discussion about the use of music with lyrics in the movie. Many questions can be raised for the sake of this discussion such as; are the lyrics relevant to the images or what is going on in the scene?, or do they refer to character’s inner thoughts?, are they adding something to the scene or narration in general?... While theorists are already struggling with these questions they are facing this song which is sort of accidently selected or if it is put in another way, they weren’t written with this movie in mind. Larsen also mentions that the only song written for this movie is Mrs. Robinson and the only common feature between the song and the character is the name. I will continue to this discussion after analysing the final scene. Also I want to repeat that the reason I additionally discussed the opening scene is, the same song, which is very much associated with Benjamin, appears in several scenes as well as in the ending scene. This association is introduced in the beginning.
In the final scene he leaves the car. As the cars stops the music stops as well. But diegetic sounds still can be heard such as the sounds of the passing cars and the sounds produced by him. He starts to run. We hear the sound of his steps and the traffic and so on. As he arrives to the church we hear a chord played by a guitar. The chord is nervous in terms of character. It is a dominant chord which creates excitement and asks a question; what happened in the church or what will happen? Then the second chord comes as he arrives at the door and tries to get in. In terms of character it is similar to the first one. Then the third chord is heard as he decides to find another way to get in to the church and takes the stairs. The forth chord comes when he finally gets in through a door and then we hear the fifth one when he arrives at a big glass wall, where he can see the bride and the groom who are about to kiss. The first chord is really intense as he goes into the church, the chords get softer and resolve but still they all sound sad not happy. He sees them already married and kissing each other. He fails. He says ‘oh Jessus…’ Then the church organ player starts to play the wedding march. It sounds very annoying, irritating, and camera shows him standing against the enormous glass wall, disappointed and miserable. To me he looks sacrificed or crucified like Jesus especially with the annoying and in a way scary church music. In these scenes guitar is associated with Benjamin and humanistic feelings such as love and especially their love. It is also associated with being naïve, being young. Benjamin and Elaine are not like their parents and they don’t fit to the society that their parents belong, which is pretty fake. On the other hand, the church organ and church music is associated with that fake society and evil. Elaine’s father, Mrs. Robinson, and their pretentious friends they are all in the church and act like they are all so decent. They witness Elaine’s wedding ceremony. Elaine is like a sacrificial animal as well. So, on the aisles there are fake and evil people. On the altar Elaine captured by those people and the church and the church music. Benjamin is across Elaine facing her from the behind but outside of the church. They don’t listen to what Benjamin listens. But on the other hand, Benjamin is outside of the church and the music associated with his adventures is played by a guitar. So guitar music is outside of the church. Guitar music is not scary and not irritating. It is naïve. Then he screams her name dramatically and hits the glass, while the church music is still playing. He takes the attention from both Elaine and the others. When the camera shows her we hear Benjamin’s voice from the distance because he is outside and also we hear the other people talking, mumbling. Then camera shows her parent’s reaction and the sound focuses on what they are saying. She walks towards him in the church. As she walks the viewer sees her close up and the talking sounds become blurring, turn into mumbles. Then she looks around, surrounded by angry people who are all saying something, yelling but they are not heard. We see these form her point of view. They are muted but Benjamin can be heard he still screams her name and hits the glass. So, he is the one for her that’s why he is not muted. Finally, she screams his name very dramatically as well. As soon as he hears her, he starts running to meet her. He is stopped by her father. They start to fight. Then the crowd arrives and joins the fight. We don’t hear any songs any more but diegetic sounds such as screams, steps, mumbles and clear dialogues, the sound of the fight and so on. It makes the scene more dramatic I think. Finally, Benjamin grabs the cross and avoids the crowd, rescues Elaine and they together leave the church. He locks everyone in the church with the cross, creates an ironic scene. They together run away and again all we hear is diegetic sound of the steps and the sound of the crowd fading away at the background, the traffic and so on. A bus arrives immediately and they get in the buss. The passengers are surprised by the couple’s entrance. They move to the back, while the sound of the engine is really so dominant, which creates a space. It really locates us in the buss. They sit down on the back seat, look back out the window, turn back and settle down. He laughs. They look each other and smile and look towards us. The close up shot to their faces is very similar to the ones previously done through the movie to Benjamin when he is alone. But now he is with this woman. He doesn’t look that much alienated or I can say now they are together alienated from the rest. But they are together. There is a slight smile on their faces. The expression of Benjamin’s is not as empty as before. And again the same song; ‘The Sound of Silence’, which always plays when he is alone, starts but this time he is not alone. But when we hear the music the characters’ expressions change slightly. They keep smiling and stop smiling for a while but finally the smile vanishes and is replaced by a bit worried or confused expression. Benjamin always looks toward us as he always does when this song plays. But she looks at around and especially at him. Again alienation, even between the lovers, can be observed. Scene changes and we see the bus form outside; from the behind. We watch them leave but the music continues and combines the scenes-again. It has a formal function as it has before several times through the movie. The film ends, the main characters’ names are appeared on a black background but the song still continues.
So Larsen thinks since the music is not composed for the movie there is no real connection between the lyrics and the narration. He also discusses in chapter 10 that when we see images with music even though there is no relation we want to create some sort of relation or we search for it and usually we create a meaning. He says we find metaphors (Larsen, Chapter 10*). I think he is right and Cook, in his book Analysing Musical Media, suggests using metaphor model to analyze audio-visual culture. Actually I read the lyrics and try to understand the relevance to Benjamin character to understand the function of the song. Is the song represent Benjamin’s thought or is it an external comment to him or to the scene in general? Actually I couldn’t find a very direct relation with the narration or his mind. According to Berliner’s and Furia’s theory, which claims, the song represents Benjamin’s thoughts and it always functions like that through the movie (Larsen, 154). I disagree so as Larsen. The lyrics are more critical to the society then Benjamin character. Benjamin is 21 year old and very confused young man. Although, he feels alienated and naïve and in a way decent than the people he is surrounded by, I don’t think he is as intellectual or mature as to make those critics done by the song. In my opinion, the song refers to his alienation and his loneliness, his confusion. So, yes, it has an emotional function. But also it makes a general and external comment both to the specific scene and the movie in general. I think the song is not in his mind. He can’t hear the song; he is far away from the song. Larsen also discusses the lyrics, its association with the narration and Benjamin’s mind. Other than couple of tiny instances, which are like coincidences there is no direct connection, he thinks, which I agree (Larsen, 154, 155, 156, 157). But on the other hand, in terms of external comment that the song made, I can say it fits nicely to the film in general. Such as the critic of the society or Benjamin’s and people’s alienation, his emotions, the critics of the church, etc. In addition to these, the song has a formal function; it perfectly combines different scenes.
Bibliography
Bordwell, David and Thompson, Kristin, Film Art; An Introduction. NY: Mc Grow Hill, 2008.
Cook, Nicholas, Analyzing Musical Multimedia. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
James Eugene Wirezbicki, Film Music: A History. NY: Routledge, 2009.
Larsen, Peter, Film Music. London: Reaktion, 2007.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
La Jetée… On Moving and Still Images
In films, throughout its history, moving images and still images, slow and fast motions, super impositions, freeze frames and other visual manipulations have been used together. Each of these manipulations and their use collectively has different effects on viewer and create different experiences. Also in theories, they are associated with life or death. In this paper, the film La Jetée will be discussed in terms of its use of these visual manipulations. It will mainly be focussed on the still and moving images’ effects and their associations with life and death. Since La Jetée is formed by still images, except one scene, first it will be focussed on some thoughts about still and moving image, and the relationship between photography and film. Then La Jetée will be discussed in terms of these issues.
Laura Mulvey, in her book, Death 24x a Second: Stillness and the Moving Image, mentions that photography and film are considered to be related to reality (Mulvey, 18). She says, ‘the technological drive towards photography and film had always been animated by the aspiration to preserve the fleeting instability of reality and passing time in a fixed image’ (Mulvey, 18). Both photography and film has technological aspects which relate them to objectivity and science. It can be said that photography is an element in film and also film is invented thanks to photography. Although, they are in that sense strongly related, still, they have different essence. On the one hand, photography has the ability to catch a moment in time but on the other hand, film captures movement in passing time. Although they are both considered to be related to reality due to their technological aspects, both photography and film are associated with magic or capability to overcome death as well (Mulvey, 18). For some, photographs are associated with life and for others it is associated with death. These associations were made based on the use of movement in photography and film. Photography freezes moments and saves the objects from corruption and their faiths, which is death. So people can associate frozen, still images with life or overcoming death because you resist to passing time and its outcomes (Mulvey, 22). So, one might say that stillness is symbol of life but by saying life it is more meant eternity or immortality, because actual life includes death as well. From this perspective then, movement is the symbol of death or real mortal life, because movement takes place in time and movement in time is something lifelike and as it is mentioned before, life has death at the end. So moving images of film signal that time is passing and this movement will come to an end which is death. When time passes things eventually die. So films, although they use series of still images, they capture movement in time, so everything in the film comes to an end as well. Then, one might suggest that, films are representations of mortal life which includes death at the end.
But on the other hand, for some it is the reverse. For example, for Barthes and Bazin, photography is associated with death (Mulvey, 60). According to Barthes, even tough photography captures moment, that shouldn’t be considered as immortality but rather just a reminder of death. You know that no matter how beautiful or alive that person looks on that photo she/he will die. Mulvey also talks about Freud’s concept of ‘Uncunny’; confusion, between natural and supernatural, animate and inanimate, regarding photography’s early association with death (Mulvey, 60, 61, 62). Related to that, she also talks about Barthes’ concept of punctum and studium. She says;
‘Barthes’s punctum….provokes a sudden and involuntary emotional response, differentiating it from the studium, the term he uses to describe the presence of social, cultural or other meanings that have been consciously invested in the image. The studium belongs to the photographer; the punctum to the viewer. Barthes also associates the phootgrapher’s punctum with a sudden and overwhelming consciousness of death’ (Mulvey, 61, 62).
She continues with an example; the photo of Lewis Payne who was photographed by Alexander Gardner before his execution. The guy in the photograph is the studium and the knowledge, which is the fact that he will die, of the viewer, is the punctum (Mulvey, 62).
Shobchack, on the other hand, disagrees with Bazin and its idea that photography is like mummification (Shobchack, 146). Sobschack says;
‘the cinema presents us with quite a different perceptual technology and mode of representation. Through it subjectively visible specialization of a frozen point of view into dynamic and intentional trajectories of self-displaying vision and through its subjectively experienced temporalization of an essential moment into lived momentum, the cinematic radically constitutes the photographic’ (Shobshack, 145).
According to Shobshack, photographic ‘functions to fix a ‘being-that-has-been’ (a presence in a present that is always past)’ (Shobchack, 146). So she thinks photographic has something to do with death. But it must be said that this is not so much different what Bazin thinks, although she thinks she disagrees with him. In addition to this, she thinks that cinematic and moving image has something to do with life (Shobchack, 146). She says ‘the moving picture is a visible representation not of activity finished or past but of activity coming into being and being. Furthermore, and even more significant, the moving picture not only visibly represents moving objects but also-and simultaneously –presents the very movement of vision itself’ (Shobchack, 146).
At this point it is useful to start looking at La Jatee, which was made by Chris Marker in 1962. It is a film about a World War III survivor, who is sent back and forth to the past for the sake of helping out humanity by this scientific experiment. Although the film is formed by still images, the audience sees them in certain flow, while they are moving. This is very much like what Shobchack tries to say. The spectator sees the ‘very movement of vision itself’. So the even though the images are still, the vision on the screen moves (Shobchack, 148). So the striking feature of Shobchack’s discussion is, she focuses on moving image instead of film or cinema and so on because the still images flowing on the screen is also a moving image and when one looks at the photography and cinema relation from this aspect the discussion can change its direction.
She also talks about how photography is controlled and can be considered as a thing while moving image is not either possessed or controlled (Shobchack, 148). These ideas can be related to Mulvey’s ideas about time. She makes a focus on time. She says ‘the problem of time, its passing, and how it is represented or preserved’ (Mulvey, 22). The arrangement of the scenes and images in passing time plays crucial role in terms of effects and the ability to control your experience. She also discusses how the control of the audience over the film changed thanks to the invention of video and then later recent technologies (Mulvey, 22). But in La Jetée, since the year was 1962, the audience has no control over the time, which creates a big difference in terms of experience because the temporal flow of the images makes the vision move.
She focuses on the scene that the woman blinks her eyes and starts to move while she was lying in the bed. She claims that the woman started to move she lost her immortality and her image as an object of desire (Shobchack, 146). So these thoughts support the idea that still images and photography has something to do with immortality and eternal life. But previously she said photography has something to do with death and past and loss. On the other hand, in the movie the protagonist travels back to prewar times and sees her in the park sleeping or sunbathing. He stares at her and says she is death because he is travelling to the past. So this can be a good reference to Barthes’ theory. The protagonist, although he is in the same frame with her and also stilled like her he looks like an outsider and he is an outsider and he looks like he is looking at a photo of her not her. So this is quite related to Bathes’s concept of punctum; the audience see her as beautiful and in a way living in that frozen moment, which is stadium, but on the other hand, they and the protagonist know that she will die or she is death by now-punctum. Also the idea that he is travelling to his own past, which is illustrated thorough photographs, looks like the director inspired by Barthes’ theory on photography’s relation to death. The main character even sees his own death through photographs.
In La Jetée, when woman blinks she loses her immortality of being an object of desire says Shobchack (Shobchack, 146). So by saying this she supports the idea that stilled image is immortal and moving image, which gives her a body, makes her mortal.
On the other hand, in the screenplay when the protagonist goes back in time and meets her, stares at her while she was sort of sleeping in the park he says she is dead. And this can be considered as a reference to Barthes’ theory on photography. Although the image in front of him is frozen in time he knows that she is already dead because he is travelling in time. This emphasizes the delay of viewing in photography and its relation to past as well.
In La Jetée there are complex relations with stilled and moving images or photography and cinema and their relation to death. It seems like the director refers Barthes’ theory on photography and death relation by using still images but on the other hand, he moves still images in a temporal flow and creates moving images. He makes them cinematic and again it ends up with death. By moving them he gives them mortal life which is, this time, different from what Barthes says. So it seems like the director relates both still images and moving images to death. Especially the scene, where the woman blinks, again emphasises her immortality. It takes her from fantasy world and makes her ‘real’.
So to sum up in La Jetée, very complex relations and effects between and of still images and moving images, reality and unreality, mortal and immortal, life and death, photography and cinema can be observed. In addition to this, many references to different theories can be traced. It is easy to relate it to thoughts which claim still images has immortal effects but also the movie can be easily associated with ideas of Barthes about death in the photograph. The use of one moving image in the movie; the scene with the blinking woman makes the audience question what is going on. But on the other hand, based on my experiences and small survey among the audience that I have seen the movie together, it could be suggested that it doesn’t have a very strong or different effect after all those other still images flowed through the film. So this supports the idea that even though they are still images since they moved on the screen as visions, they don’t create a very different effect than the actual moving images. But on the other hand, it would be said that the moving woman image is more mortal then still woman image. So La Jetée is such a nice example to analyse the effects of movement and stillness on the screen and the effects of time.
Bibliography
Mulvey, Laura, Death 24x a Second; Stillness and the Moving Image. Reaktion Books, 2009.
Shobchack, Vivian, Carnal of Thoughts; Embodiment and Moving Image Culture. University of California Press, 2004.
Laura Mulvey, in her book, Death 24x a Second: Stillness and the Moving Image, mentions that photography and film are considered to be related to reality (Mulvey, 18). She says, ‘the technological drive towards photography and film had always been animated by the aspiration to preserve the fleeting instability of reality and passing time in a fixed image’ (Mulvey, 18). Both photography and film has technological aspects which relate them to objectivity and science. It can be said that photography is an element in film and also film is invented thanks to photography. Although, they are in that sense strongly related, still, they have different essence. On the one hand, photography has the ability to catch a moment in time but on the other hand, film captures movement in passing time. Although they are both considered to be related to reality due to their technological aspects, both photography and film are associated with magic or capability to overcome death as well (Mulvey, 18). For some, photographs are associated with life and for others it is associated with death. These associations were made based on the use of movement in photography and film. Photography freezes moments and saves the objects from corruption and their faiths, which is death. So people can associate frozen, still images with life or overcoming death because you resist to passing time and its outcomes (Mulvey, 22). So, one might say that stillness is symbol of life but by saying life it is more meant eternity or immortality, because actual life includes death as well. From this perspective then, movement is the symbol of death or real mortal life, because movement takes place in time and movement in time is something lifelike and as it is mentioned before, life has death at the end. So moving images of film signal that time is passing and this movement will come to an end which is death. When time passes things eventually die. So films, although they use series of still images, they capture movement in time, so everything in the film comes to an end as well. Then, one might suggest that, films are representations of mortal life which includes death at the end.
But on the other hand, for some it is the reverse. For example, for Barthes and Bazin, photography is associated with death (Mulvey, 60). According to Barthes, even tough photography captures moment, that shouldn’t be considered as immortality but rather just a reminder of death. You know that no matter how beautiful or alive that person looks on that photo she/he will die. Mulvey also talks about Freud’s concept of ‘Uncunny’; confusion, between natural and supernatural, animate and inanimate, regarding photography’s early association with death (Mulvey, 60, 61, 62). Related to that, she also talks about Barthes’ concept of punctum and studium. She says;
‘Barthes’s punctum….provokes a sudden and involuntary emotional response, differentiating it from the studium, the term he uses to describe the presence of social, cultural or other meanings that have been consciously invested in the image. The studium belongs to the photographer; the punctum to the viewer. Barthes also associates the phootgrapher’s punctum with a sudden and overwhelming consciousness of death’ (Mulvey, 61, 62).
She continues with an example; the photo of Lewis Payne who was photographed by Alexander Gardner before his execution. The guy in the photograph is the studium and the knowledge, which is the fact that he will die, of the viewer, is the punctum (Mulvey, 62).
Shobchack, on the other hand, disagrees with Bazin and its idea that photography is like mummification (Shobchack, 146). Sobschack says;
‘the cinema presents us with quite a different perceptual technology and mode of representation. Through it subjectively visible specialization of a frozen point of view into dynamic and intentional trajectories of self-displaying vision and through its subjectively experienced temporalization of an essential moment into lived momentum, the cinematic radically constitutes the photographic’ (Shobshack, 145).
According to Shobshack, photographic ‘functions to fix a ‘being-that-has-been’ (a presence in a present that is always past)’ (Shobchack, 146). So she thinks photographic has something to do with death. But it must be said that this is not so much different what Bazin thinks, although she thinks she disagrees with him. In addition to this, she thinks that cinematic and moving image has something to do with life (Shobchack, 146). She says ‘the moving picture is a visible representation not of activity finished or past but of activity coming into being and being. Furthermore, and even more significant, the moving picture not only visibly represents moving objects but also-and simultaneously –presents the very movement of vision itself’ (Shobchack, 146).
At this point it is useful to start looking at La Jatee, which was made by Chris Marker in 1962. It is a film about a World War III survivor, who is sent back and forth to the past for the sake of helping out humanity by this scientific experiment. Although the film is formed by still images, the audience sees them in certain flow, while they are moving. This is very much like what Shobchack tries to say. The spectator sees the ‘very movement of vision itself’. So the even though the images are still, the vision on the screen moves (Shobchack, 148). So the striking feature of Shobchack’s discussion is, she focuses on moving image instead of film or cinema and so on because the still images flowing on the screen is also a moving image and when one looks at the photography and cinema relation from this aspect the discussion can change its direction.
She also talks about how photography is controlled and can be considered as a thing while moving image is not either possessed or controlled (Shobchack, 148). These ideas can be related to Mulvey’s ideas about time. She makes a focus on time. She says ‘the problem of time, its passing, and how it is represented or preserved’ (Mulvey, 22). The arrangement of the scenes and images in passing time plays crucial role in terms of effects and the ability to control your experience. She also discusses how the control of the audience over the film changed thanks to the invention of video and then later recent technologies (Mulvey, 22). But in La Jetée, since the year was 1962, the audience has no control over the time, which creates a big difference in terms of experience because the temporal flow of the images makes the vision move.
She focuses on the scene that the woman blinks her eyes and starts to move while she was lying in the bed. She claims that the woman started to move she lost her immortality and her image as an object of desire (Shobchack, 146). So these thoughts support the idea that still images and photography has something to do with immortality and eternal life. But previously she said photography has something to do with death and past and loss. On the other hand, in the movie the protagonist travels back to prewar times and sees her in the park sleeping or sunbathing. He stares at her and says she is death because he is travelling to the past. So this can be a good reference to Barthes’ theory. The protagonist, although he is in the same frame with her and also stilled like her he looks like an outsider and he is an outsider and he looks like he is looking at a photo of her not her. So this is quite related to Bathes’s concept of punctum; the audience see her as beautiful and in a way living in that frozen moment, which is stadium, but on the other hand, they and the protagonist know that she will die or she is death by now-punctum. Also the idea that he is travelling to his own past, which is illustrated thorough photographs, looks like the director inspired by Barthes’ theory on photography’s relation to death. The main character even sees his own death through photographs.
In La Jetée, when woman blinks she loses her immortality of being an object of desire says Shobchack (Shobchack, 146). So by saying this she supports the idea that stilled image is immortal and moving image, which gives her a body, makes her mortal.
On the other hand, in the screenplay when the protagonist goes back in time and meets her, stares at her while she was sort of sleeping in the park he says she is dead. And this can be considered as a reference to Barthes’ theory on photography. Although the image in front of him is frozen in time he knows that she is already dead because he is travelling in time. This emphasizes the delay of viewing in photography and its relation to past as well.
In La Jetée there are complex relations with stilled and moving images or photography and cinema and their relation to death. It seems like the director refers Barthes’ theory on photography and death relation by using still images but on the other hand, he moves still images in a temporal flow and creates moving images. He makes them cinematic and again it ends up with death. By moving them he gives them mortal life which is, this time, different from what Barthes says. So it seems like the director relates both still images and moving images to death. Especially the scene, where the woman blinks, again emphasises her immortality. It takes her from fantasy world and makes her ‘real’.
So to sum up in La Jetée, very complex relations and effects between and of still images and moving images, reality and unreality, mortal and immortal, life and death, photography and cinema can be observed. In addition to this, many references to different theories can be traced. It is easy to relate it to thoughts which claim still images has immortal effects but also the movie can be easily associated with ideas of Barthes about death in the photograph. The use of one moving image in the movie; the scene with the blinking woman makes the audience question what is going on. But on the other hand, based on my experiences and small survey among the audience that I have seen the movie together, it could be suggested that it doesn’t have a very strong or different effect after all those other still images flowed through the film. So this supports the idea that even though they are still images since they moved on the screen as visions, they don’t create a very different effect than the actual moving images. But on the other hand, it would be said that the moving woman image is more mortal then still woman image. So La Jetée is such a nice example to analyse the effects of movement and stillness on the screen and the effects of time.
Bibliography
Mulvey, Laura, Death 24x a Second; Stillness and the Moving Image. Reaktion Books, 2009.
Shobchack, Vivian, Carnal of Thoughts; Embodiment and Moving Image Culture. University of California Press, 2004.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Hable Con Ella: In regard to Embodied Spectatorship
̏ The material elements that present themselves in films directly stimulate the material layers of the human being: his nerves, his senses, his entire physiological substance ̋.
(Kracauer, cited by Sobchack, 55)
̏…although, I do have the capacity to fully-and literally- feel the specific texture and weight of the silk blouse I am wearing, my tactile desire is located elsewhere, in the onscreen taffeta and wool, and so, intending elsewhere, I feel the specificity of the silk on my skin only partially and diffusely ̋.
(Sobchack,78).
‘During the earlier periods in the history of film theory there were various attempts to understand the meaningful relation between cinema and our sensate bodies’ (Sobchack, 54). But Sobchack also adds that until recent years this topic was ignored by the film theorists. This paper will focus on embodied film spectatorship. This issue will be discussed through an analysis of the film; Hable Con Ella, (Talk to Her) (2002), made by Pedro Almadóvar. The film is selected because as a spectator, I was impressed to see how strongly I experienced the film bodily.
The film focuses on the relationship of both among two men protagonists Benigno and Marco and also their relationships with two women Alicia and Lydia. Benigno is a nurse looking after Alicia, who is in coma and Marco is sort of a boyfriend to Lydia, who is a bullfighter and who is also in coma after the accident occurred in the bullfight. Benigno and Marco become friends as a result of this shared experience and the time spent in the same hospital.
The first scene it will be focussed on is the dressing up scene of Lydia because in terms of embodied spectatorship experience it is quite strong. In the scene, she enters the room while the other characters were having a conversation. While they are still talking, one of the men takes the garment so that he could help her dressing up. This is how the spectator is introduced to the matador garment. Then the pieces of the costume are shown in detail. The camera focuses on her legs and the pink, very tight socks. Special care has been given to the sound in the scene. The conversation at the back ground is either ended or just ignored on purpose by the director. So other than the sound of the clothes the viewer is left in silence. But the sound of the clothes can be heard so clearly and it dominates the scene. All the sounds are produced by the touch of the garment to the body of the women and also the man. The viewer feels the heavy and very elaborate decorations of the garments due to the sound and the close up view. In addition to that, the device he uses to do the buttons contributes to convey this feeling. The dress is too tight that he cannot use his fingers to button it. Other than sound, also the vision makes the spectator realize this feeling. Although her body is very tight, fit and slim, she can still hardly fit into the dress. Camera shows the whole dressing up process closely. There is no tiniest bit of space between her skin and the garment. As a spectator I felt the heaviness and tightness of the dress and felt suffocated. I felt myself inside of the costume and my body has become her body. The scene ends with him standing in front of her, grabbing the jacket of the garment on both neckbands and pulling harshly as a final touch. Once again based on the strong sound resulted by the harsh move and the vision of the move of his body and her body joggled by his move make the spectator feel that the dress is too heavy, elaborately decorated and too tight, which doesn’t allow you to even move.
As it is mentioned previously the scene illustrates a good example to haptic vision. The term ‘haptic visuality’ is used by Laura Marks and basically refers to our experiencing the vision on the screen sensually, in other words, to perceive the scene bodily (Sobchack, 56). If more explanation is needed, haptic visuality gives you the sense of touch, sense of smell and so on. For example, in the scene that is discussed above, even tough the viewer can not touch to the matador garment literally, still she/he can feel the texture, the decorations and the tightness of the costume. Although as Sobchack mentions this aspect of visioning is ignored by the theorists, still some works and studies have been done focussing on this. Deleuze writes that Eisenstein ̏continually reminds us that ‘intellectual cinema’ has as correlate ‘sensory thought’ or ‘emotional intelligence,’ and is worthless without it ̋ (Sobchack, 55). She mentions about a study which took place in Unites States in 1930s and focussed on the ‘galvanic responses’ and blood pressure of the spectators. Also she reminds Walter Benjamin’s ideas about cinema (Sobchack, 56). Benjamin, in his article ̏ The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction ̋ (1935), also talks about tactile appropriation and experiencing the movie in distraction, meaning; the spectator also experiences the film through senses and bodily without really thinking about it (Benjamin, 14, Sobchack, 65).
According to Kraucauer, cinema has the power to ̏ stimulate us physiologically and sensually ̋ (Sobchack, 55). He also sees spectator as a ‘corporal material being’ and he thinks cinema touches on this corporal material being. This being touched by the cinema would be called embodied spectatorship (Sobchack, 55, 56). To explain embodied spectatorship more in detail it would be useful to discuss two related terms which are synaesthesia and coenaesthesia (Sobchack, 67).
Synaesthesia can be defined as ‘involuntary experience’ (Sobchack, 67). Synaesthesia experience is immediate, direct, and concrete and the meaning is clear. It is more like being and living it (Sobchack , 68). Also synaesthesiatic perception makes the viewer to receive the sound as colour, shape and taste (Sobchack, 67). So this explains why the sound is so important and why just ordinary diagetic sounds are so exaggerated in the films. Also in the scene that is discussed in this paper the diagetic sounds are so dominant. The other term coenaesthesia refers to the whole sensorial being (Sobchack, 67). So when the spectator sees a film these two work together and make him/her experience the film bodily.
It would be useful at this point to look at another scene which can illustrate all these explanations of the terms and the concepts. So the next scene it will be focussed is the cleaning of Alicia’s body by Benigno and another nurse. In the scene, basically, two nurses are cleaning Alicia’s body with sponge, cloth, some cleaneser product, and talking. Again the sound is very dominant. It makes the viewer experience the scene. You feel how the sponge and foam touches on the skin. This is not just because of the sound in the scene but also because of the knowledge and lived experience of yours. You know how it feels because you experienced it bodily for many times (Sobchack, 60, 71, 73). As a spectator you relate your body to the characters’ body on the scene. You feel the scene on your body through seeing the body or bodies on the screen. Sobchack calls this bodily reflexivity (Sobchack, 79). Also by looking at Alicia’s body you can feel that she is lifeless. You reach to this judgement by looking at her movements and reactions when the nurses are touching her. So all the images and the whole mise-en-scène in the scene communicate both with your knowledge and also with your senses and make you experience the scene bodily and make sense of the scene. Sobchack says ̏… cinema uses ‘lived modes’ of perceptual and sensory experience (seeing, movement, and hearing the most dominant) as ‘sign-vehicles’ of representation ̋ (Sobchack, 74). She continues; ̏…the cinema simultaneously represents experience through dynamic presentation and it also presents experience as representation ̋ (Sobchack, 74).
To sum up, Hable con Ella is a good example for embodied spectatorship. It uses sound and body very dominantly which allows the spectator to experience the film bodily even more. As a viewer I was so impressed with my bodily reactions. I felt the film on my whole body so strongly which is why I decided to focus on this film. In the scenes which have been focussed in this paper, the sound was very dominant and as it is mentioned before this was one of the key elements which trigger synaesthetic perception. Cinema by using both lived bodily knowledge and the relation of sound and vision to touch and other senses such as taste, communicates with the spectator not just mentally and not just on the screen but also bodily and more three dimensionally and literally.
Bibliography
Walter Benjamin, ̏ The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction ̋, 1935.
Vivian Sobchack, Carnal of Thougths: Embodiment and Moving Image Culture, University of California Press, 2004.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
