Going to the movies and watching a film is, at its very heart, a voyeuristic activity. We sit and watch other people’s lives and stories from afar framed by the screen and form opinions and cast judgements on what we are watching. Alfred Hitchcock throws that voyeurism in our faces with “Rear Window”.

“Rear Window” is a great example of what a master director with a master editor can accomplish. We watch a mostly point-of-view presentation of how a story is created in one’s mind and how that story can infect others that surround a character. We watch as L.B. Jefferies, confined to his wheelchair, becomes involved in the other lives of his neighbors as he voyeuristically watches their lives unfold, framed by the windows of their apartments.

We watch “Jeff” as he watches his neighbors and we become consumed by what he is seeing through classic A-B-A editing. A: We see him watching something. B: We cut to see what he is seeing. A: We cut back to get his reaction to what he is seeing. As the Bordwell reading stated, “the Kuleshov effect operates here: Our mind connects the two parts of space”, Jeff’s apartment and the courtyard, without the use of an establishing shot. This sequence of cuts is repeated over and over again to develop the movie-like story of his neighbors where he forms his opinions and casts judgements on what he is seeing and hearing. Given the lack of details, he fills in the gaps by coming to his own conclusions based purely on his visual input from afar. This is the Kuleshov effect on the part of Jeff himself. He connects the dots in his own mind based simply on what he sees and hears while he watches the movie of his neighbors unfold.

For me, “Rear Window” was a film of a man watching a movie of his neighbors. Each window in the courtyard presents a screen for us to voyeuristically watch as Jeff also voyeuristically watches his neighbors progress through their everyday lives and, oh yes, commits murder.

The post Voyeurism of the Movies: Alfred Hitchcock’s Rear Window appeared first on Sanat Duvarı.

At about 40 minutes in the movie, we see Jack and Sally in the railway station bar getting to know each other a little. At this moment, Jack begins to tell Sally the story of his involvement with the police department. This analysis starts with Jack and Sally sitting in a booth in the bar having a conversation over drinks and smokes. There is music playing in the background, supposedly coming from the bar jukebox. Sally askes Jack “What did you do?” The music in the background is diegetic, since it is part of the world of the railway station bar. We also hear the murmuring of the bar crowd in the background giving us the feel of a busy place, but Jack and Sally don’t see or hear the crowd. They are deeply engaged in their conversation. Jack begins to tell his story of his police force involvement.

At 40:34, the scene cuts to a flashback of Jack explaining what “a wire” is to Sally. The music instantly changes and is now non-diegetic as it is not part of the world of the scene. Jack transitions from a foreground character in the bar to the narrator of the flashback. Jack’s dialog becomes non-diegetic. We know that this is a piece of Jack’s history that he is relaying based on the use of narration. We hear little details from the scene, like the sound of the tape being applied to the chest of Freddie Corso. We hear Jack’s fingers slide down the cable as he dresses it in place and prepares Freddie and the wire. The scene cuts to the outdoor night scene with Freddie’s voice counting to 10 as the bridge to this cut. The music changes again to a curious melody and we hear the car with Freddie and his mob connection drive up. Jack’s narration of the flashback continues. We see Jack in the surveillance car and we hear what Jack hears via the wire. We know that because the fidelity of the spoken word shifts to that of a low fidelity radio broadcast. We also continue to hear the faint background noise of the night time traffic in the area.

At 41:36, we cut to the next scene where Jack’s car is now moving and Jack’s narration continues. We hear the purring of the car’s motor in the background, reinforcing that the car is in motion. We hear the conversation within the car with Mr. Corso and we see the POV of Jack from his car. Again, the low fidelity of the conversation reinforces that we are hearing what Jack is hearing. The scene cuts to inside the vehicle where Corso and the mob boss are talking. The fidelity of the speaking sound improves so now we, the viewers, are in the car eavesdropping on the conversation. The scene cuts back and forth between Jacks car and the car with Corso and the sound fidelity of the conversation shifts between low and high with each cut reinforcing what we are seeing in the scene.

At 42:11, we are back in the car with Jack and his non-diegetic narration continues. We begin to hear static from the wire feed and ominous background music re-enters the scene helping to build the suspense. The static continues…

At 42:11, we are back in the car with Jack and his non-diegetic narration continues. We begin to hear static from the wire feed and ominous background music re-enters the scene helping to build the suspense. The static continues as Jack fumbles with the cables to try to fix the issue with no luck. We return to the interior of the car with Corso as the conversation continues with Jack’s narration continuing to build the story to Sally. Corso finally says to “pullover to the gas station. I got to take a piss.” The ominous music builds and that is all we hear as we watch the car pull over and Corso rushes out to an old building to take care of the wire that is shorting out on his body. We hear Corso struggling with the wire apparatus to try to strip it from his body. Now suspicious, the mobster follows Corso into the building and we hear the mobster’s steps. Jack becomes alarmed now that his plan has unraveled and moves to try to save Corso. Jack and his car mate have a brief argument as we see the mobster rush out of the building to his awaiting car and we hear the engine start. The mobster’s car speeds away because we hear the tires squeal as the car departs the scene. Jack rushes into the building but all we hear is the building background music. The music reaches a crescendo as Jack throws open the bathroom door only to find Corso hanging with Jack’s wire around his neck. Corso is dead. He is dead due to Jack’s equipment that failed. We hear the creaks of the wire as Corso swings with his feet off the ground. The music’s volume lowers a little and the tone and pace changes to match Jack’s newly realized despair. The melancholy music continues as a bridge as we cut back to the present time with Jack finalizing his story to Sally in the bar.

This is a perfect example for the sound of a movie. There are a lot of details and technical terms as well. I really enjoyed to see all those details and discover word of the sound. I tried to pull apart every detail about sound in this movie. I hope you enjoy it.

Cheers!

The post The Sound of a Movie about Sound appeared first on Sanat Duvarı.

Singin’ in the Rain

From the very beginning of the film we have the characters Lena Lamont (Jean Hagen) and Don Lockwood (Gene Kelly) arriving as a couple to their new movie premier. All the gossip around town has positioned Lena and Don as a couple that Lena encourages and Don tolerates. The arrival of Zelda Sanders and with her “well known eligible bachelor”. She is young, He is old. She is dressed in white and black. He is dressed in black and white. Duality. Olga and the Baron arrive as a couple, married for a whole 2 months. Don and Lena arrive, both dressed in glamorous white with huge smiles on their faces. Definitely presenting themselves as a couple. They are “like bacon and eggs”. You could argue that Don and Cosmo Brown (Donald O’Connor) are a couple. They have been together since childhood. They danced together, they sang together, they acted together. Their history provided the foundation to introduce singing and dancing to the film, which is the classical backstage musical style of this genre, as defined by Bordwell, where “the action centering on singers and dancers who perform for an audience within the story world.”

However, in the Altman reading “The Structure of the American Film Musical” he states that “an interesting variation on the traditional paired-scene arrangement involves the introduction of one or more wrong couples. This is Don and Lena. As the film suggests, all the Hollywood wags want them as a couple but they are not “Fated to be Mated” as the film progresses. They present the exterior expected relationship that the public wants to see but they are not really a couple, much to the protests of Lena.

Don is finally introduced to Kathy Selden, a poor chorus dancer/singer. Initially she is the opposite of Don. He is a star. She is a chorus dancer. He is dress formally (although a little tattered from girls mobbing him). She is dresses plainly. He is in formal black and white. She is dressed in plain brown and grey neutral colors. He wants her. She resists him. This presents the classic duality of the American Musical genre.

The mating ritual between Don and Kathy culminates with the scene when the two enter “the empty stage” and then dance to the crooned song “You Were Meant for Me”.

The narrative is not the essential element of the American Musical genre. We do see a general story for “Singin’ in the Rain”. However, the story is there to deliver the setups for the song and dance scenes.

This film is a great example of the backstage musical genre. And, all I got to say is that “they don’t make them like this anymore!”

The post Fated to be Mated in Singin’ in the Rain appeared first on Sanat Duvarı.

The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie: Le Charme Discret De La Bourgeoisie is a surrealist film produced in 1972 (Kinder, 1999). It was directed by Luis Bunuel and written by Jean-Claude Carriere. The film is mainly in French with a few dialogues in Spanish and was made in France. The narrative is based on a group of upper middle class folks who attempt to dine together notwithstanding continued interruptions. Surrealist film production is a modern approach of film theory with its origins dating back to the 1920s in Paris and uses classical narration. It is related to Dada cinema and characterized by rejection of dramatic psychology, juxtapositions, and recurrent use of dreadful imagery. Surrealism seeks to expound on the creative potential of the unconscious mind. The film consists of linked scenes with four dreams from different characters and five gatherings among a group of Bourgeois friends (Kinder, 1999).

The beginning is centered on the gatherings while the dreams are expressed at the end though there is intertwining of scenes. The beginning of the film is of a bourgeois couple; the Thevenots who accompany Mme., Rafael Acosta and Florence, Thevenots’s sister to Senechals house. The Senechal’s are hosting a dinner party. However, when they arrive Alice Senechal is surprised to see them as she was expecting them the following evening. The guests invite Mme to join them for dinner at a nearby inn. There are no diners in the inn though the cheap prices, the waitress is reluctant and sounds of crying voices can be heard from the next room. Upon learning that the manager had died a few hours earlier, the party leaves with rush (Kinder, 1999). The bourgeois friends’ later attempt to have lunch at the Senechals, however, Cassel and his wife escape to the garden to have sex instead of joining their friends. One of them mentions that the police might be coming and the Senechals leave to avoid arrest. There was an alleged fear of cocaine trafficking and again the party leaves in panic.

The women later visit a tea house that has run out of beverages and only has water. They meet a soldier who tells them about his life and the death of his mother (Kinder, 1999). According to the soldier, his heartless father took over his education and the mother, inform of a ghost informed him that was not his real father. He poisons and kills him following the ghost’s request. Meanwhile, when the Senechals return from their garden, they meet a bishop in their house and their friends long gone. They angrily throw him out and later embrace him with respect when he returns in his bishop’s robes. This clearly shows their prejudice, hypocrisy and snobbery. The bishop requests for a gardening job explaining his troubled childhood (Kinder, 1999). His parents were murdered and the criminal was never arrested. He later on goes to bless a dying man and when he finds out that it was the man who killed his parents; he first blesses him then kills him with a shotgun. This continues to express the level of hypocrisy among the characters in this film.

The film consists of a number of unsuccessful dinner parties with various interruptions such as the arrival of a group of army officers and a revelation that the French colonel’s dining room was a stage set for a performance in one of the dreams (Kinder, 1999). Confusing dream sequences are also presented with numerous ghost appearances. Bunuel continuously frustrates his characters by playing tricks on them. They are charmed towards fine dinners that they highly expect and later disappointed. It is important to note how they never stop trying and expect to attain all they desire. The most disappointing aspect about them is that although they express their anger politely, they think that they have a natural right to get everything they want and have others spoil them. The film showcases a sense of entitlement among characters, hypocrisy and corruption. Their fears are explored in the dreams. Characters are afraid of public humiliation, guns and being arrested by the police. Dream sequences are rooted in each other character’s dreams. Bunuel uses dreams within dreams in playing tricks on the audience as one tries to make sense of the story. The final sequence is of a repeater scene of six people walking purposefully and silently on a long isolated country road without a known destination (Kinder, 1999).

Bunuel was known for his unusual shooting style in this particular film that involved editing the film in camera during the production. He used video playback monitors on set that resulted to a different style. This was different from his usual static camera framing and close-ups. He was more comfortable and had limited direction employing more physical and technical instructions. According to Bunuel, physical appearance and movements were more essential as compared to motivation. The joke about him filming one of his dreams whenever he needed an extra scene is quite famous. This film consisted of three of Bunuel’s dreams; a dream of meeting his dead cousin, waking up to see his dead parents staring at him, and forgetting his lines on stage (Kinder, 1999).

The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie, 1972 is crowded with ambiguity from the very beginning with internal drama from characters (Kinder, 1999). The image of the wondering bourgeoisie at the beginning establishes a structure of inarticulateness; the audience needs to pay very close attention to how the film unfolds and the replacement of the film motion into closure and catharsis. As the audience we need to be attentive to have a chance at answering the questions that arise throughout the narration. The classical form of narration in this film has embraced the modern forms of bourgeois art accentuating harmony, order and proportion. Deceptive charm among characters is able to keep us fascinated with an endless glamour that sustains a sense of rationality. Bunuel has succeffully used a structural tool of the comic annoyance of interruptions. Some of the scenes are literally set for mockery reminding us of the hypocrisy characterizing the characters. The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie has paved the way for other narrative filmmakers through the demonstration of coexistence between form and anti-form in film making.

Surrealism has been expressed through the constant redirection of dreams and juxtaposition of the main plot. The group’s desire to dine together is endlessly unfulfilled by a number of interruptions and diversions. The image of six characters walking down a country road reminds us of the lack and purpose ascribed to them by Bunuel (Kinder, 1999). This brings many questions among the audience on what could, might or just isn’t. By this way we can learn the rules of film engagement. Some important dialogue parts have been excluded leaving us to think the meaning due to sounds of low flying jets. Bunuel points out that an ideal life to him consists of two hours of being awake and twenty two of sleeping and dreaming. He often eliminated anything that has symbolic meaning in his films. Dreams are considered to be part of our daily lives and we can relate to the change of events between the real world and the overlapping dreams.

Bunuel is the original surrealist who used irony and a playful form in the creation of this film to start an interest within his audience. Dinner is a chief ritual for the middle class that shows richness and good manners (Kinder, 1999). It has been used in this film with a joke of interruptions that describe aristocracy in the society. Issues of drug dealing, murder, military coups, perversion and excruciating boredom are all showcased. Most of his main characters are rich though the supporting ones have a charming mood describing them. Bunuel uses dark comedy to show black humor. Humor has been used in serious subject matter to create light moments that the audience can easily relate to.

The use of dreams and dream interpretations in The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie explores the relationship between surrealism and Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalysis. Psychoanalysis is a psychological theory that shows the interaction between the conscious and the unconscious mind. It aims at resurfacing conflicts and fears into the conscious mind through methods such as dream interpretation. There are a number of similarities between psychoanalysis and surrealism. They are both based on the nothingness mind. Psychoanalysis explains how our behaviors are influenced by the past while surrealism is influenced by the mind evoking feelings through the use of visual arts. Bunuel significantly expresses the relationship between surrealism and psychoanalysis in The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie through dream comments and behaviors conjured from the subconscious minds of characters.

Reference

• Kinder, M. (1999). Luis Buñuel’s The discreet charm of the bourgeoisie. Cambridge [U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

The post The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie appeared first on Sanat Duvarı.