What's new

The Cinematography Discussion #2 (1 Viewer)

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
Adam, you bring up 2 points I have noticed. The cinematography in ITB is sometimes quite bold, in a way. Seems maybe ironic for such a low key film. Also, there is extensive use of fades at different points. It impresses me how effectively fades are used to enhance the emotion.


Where's the official discussion? It's coming. I promise. Any more technical hassles aside, I'm aiming for the last week of June.
 

Adam_S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2001
Messages
6,316
Real Name
Adam_S
actually, although there were many 'wow' moments where I was really impressed with the cinematography, it's some of the smaller moments that I really love. In fact the scene that sticks most in my head is just a very short shot. It's a high shot, from the front entryway of the house, you can see the stairwell on the left side of the frame the door to the outside just slightly off center, and the opening into the foyer on the right side of the frame. Sissy Spacek enters from the bottom of the frame and walks to the door and looks out it, then there is a slow fade ending the mere seconds-long moments. Very emotional. And a beautiful, understated way to get across her mood and the atmosphere in the house without ever seeing her face. I'll be gone most of next weekend so will not be posting right away :p

Adam
 

Mike Broadman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
4,950
I have to see In the Bedroom again, but I do remember the very powerful set of short scenes that show the couple going about their daily routine. It's done in a way that evokes ultimate sadness and meditative melancholy, even though they're just doing things like mowing the lawn. In fact, I can't even remember what they were doing, but I do remember how it made me feel. Now that is powerful cinematography.
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
Yes, Mike. I think you and Adam are talking about the same segment. They are just doing things like mowing the lawn, watching TV and looking out a window. That is a brief, but surprisingly powerful segment. One I was planning on talking about. There is a similar sequence during the funeral, though without the fades.

Great stuff.
 

Mike Broadman

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2001
Messages
4,950
Good luck John. If you need some dudes to pay a "visit" to this fella, let us know...

I watched The Exorcist last night, so I'm ready for the discussion. I don't like horror movies so I was surprised by how well this was made. And the DVD transfer and aggressive sound mix is pretty sweet, too.
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
Looks like I should have the hardware issues worked out.


I will try like hell to get the discussion of In the Bedroom posted this weekend.





Hope I didn't speak too soon. ;)
 

Adam_S

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2001
Messages
6,316
Real Name
Adam_S
:D I just picked up In the Bedroom for 7.88 at our local video store, and was looking forward to a rewatch. Good timing (I hope)

Adam
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
Yes, I have completely confirmed that the hardware I got my hands on does work completely, so I will be doing the discussion soon. It's a bit more of a hassle than I was hoping. The images should look good enough. Maybe not as good as a direct capture, but this is a mega $$ converter I am using, so the results better be good.
 

Agee Bassett

Supporting Actor
Joined
Feb 13, 2001
Messages
922
PatrickL’s treatise on Klute, and the corresponding quotes by distinguished D.P. Gordon Willis, elucidates very neatly the unique, defining art of the expressive cinematographer; i.e., his ability to crystallize and expand upon the conceptual nucleus of a film’s psychological and emotional content through the use of visuals. Rather than simply repeat or paraphrase them here, I would like to amplify by discussing, fundamentally, how the elite cinematographer’s fluent grasp of both the graphic, as well as dramatic, texture of a piece, and his ability to deftly fuse them into a unified, synergistic thesis, achieves this goal of supplying a wholly organic “inner commentary” upon—and, thus, subtly enhancing—a film’s action.



Five Points of Cinematography

In theory, cinematographic texture can be divided into five basic components, through which the visual film artist may articulate his ideas: image values; composition; lighting; movement; and imagery (an abstract concept which may be thought of as the synthesis of the preceding interpretive components to the chosen subject matter). As his media of expression, the cinematographer has a varied and flexible “palette” at his disposal; which, through skilled application of his “brushes” (camera, lens, dolly, lamps, light meter, etc.), he may marshal into a complex and illustrative equivalent of the screenplay description. Through careful exploitation of these media, he may isolate or augment visual attributes for the purpose of emphasis. Through the rendition of image values, he may control or define spectral or tonal attributes or associations: For instance, he may choose to photograph in monochrome, so as to accentuate form, shape, and texture; or he may opt for color, to stress hue and saturation. Through the stylization of lighting, he may control or define photogenic attributes or associations:—he may endeavor to highlight a performer’s eyes from her face by positioning catchlights adjacent to the lens axis; or he may fancy suggesting approaching twilight by lighting his set in a very low-key manner. Through the utilization of composition, he may control or define spatial or geometric attributes or associations:—he may wish to emphasize physical distance between two players by placing them at opposing edges of the frame; or he may desire to relate an object to its physical surroundings by photographing it from an angle which distinguishes scale. [Note: Here, composition not only entails specifically the arrangement of objects within a defined frame, but also the aspect in which they are depicted (angle, geometry). Therefore, camera angles/lens selection will henceforth be considered a subdivision of composition.]

The innate qualities of these essential components combine and congeal to create graphic texture, which imbue an image of its aesthetic qualities. However, at this remove, all the cinematographer has is a gallery of visually-appealing pictures, bereft of any context or meaning. Because of the narrative and dramatic demands of a motion picture’s structural framework, the prudent cinematographer must needs harness and subjugate command of his images at the service of story and character, and align his ideas in harmonization with the dramatic thrust of the piece. This is achieved by an equally-fluent understanding of dramatic texture.



Three Forms of Cinematic Reality

Cinematic reality, as divided by renowned theorist/critic Andre Bazin, assumes three conceivable forms: “1.) A purely logical and descriptive analysis… 2.) A psychological analysis, from within the film, namely one that fits the point of view of one of the protagonists in a given situation… 3.) A psychological analysis from the point of view of the spectator.” These types—which one might abbreviate as objective, subjective, and ironic, respectively—as applied in a filmic sense, combine and congeal to form dramatic texture; which—naturally enough—infuses a narrative composition of its dramatic qualities. As the visual predominates in cinema, a pictorial equivalent of this content must be fashioned and integrated in order to vividly communicate its essence, in accordance with the grammar of the medium. In other words, graphic texture must be manipulated to coordinate with and complement dramatic texture, in order that a unified and expressive thesis may be achieved.

The expressive cinematographer’s approach in exploiting the graphic media at his command, as cited in the examples given in the section above, must diversify to embrace a new dimension and analogously convey the dramatic angle and psychological and emotional subtext of the material. To illustrate, his choice to shoot in monochrome may now be predicated upon his judgment that the dramatic constraints of a piece dictate a strong departure from reality; or, perhaps, an enhancement of its literal attributes to convey an apparent realism. By the same token, he may decide that color would more authentically imbue a scene with the verisimilitude necessary to persuade of its literal realism; or, perchance, to embellish the same properties in order to evoke a mood of fantasy. Again, his composition of two players at opposing ends of the frame may now also take on the nuance of suggesting emotional, as well as physical, distance between the two characters; or his framing of one object against another may add onto its physical connotations an aspect of psychological significance or sensation. Yet again, the catchlights reflected in his leading lady’s eyes may befit the romantic atmosphere desired, besides the mere photogenic reasons; or, his low-key chiaroscuro to suggest looming twilight may analogously summon the somber mood the dramatic essence prescribes relevant to the scene.

In précis, the cinematographer must be able to elastically acclimate the graphic properties of his images with the objective, subjective, or ironic point of view dictated by the material; or chief creative force (usually the director) of a given film. Hardly a restriction of his artifice, this symbiotic relationship is the very lifeblood of the cinematographer’s art. The talented, fluent cinematographer, with superior tools and means at his command, can weave together of both manner of texture a dazzling tapestry of superior craftsmanship without compromise of the tiniest stitch of high artifice.



Among the many cinematographic specimens that represent this paradigm of superior cinematic artistry are the three specimens analyzed below.
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
Thanks Agee.


With that, we will be starting (finally) The Cinematography Discussion #2. My images are all captured, corrected, sized, optimized and so on, and now I'll finish the writing to go with them. First, though, I'm taking a breather as well as a shower, so I can feel a little fresher for the closing stretch. Good thing this forum doesn't have smellovision.


The captures I ended up gettin by somewhat indirect means are not quite up to the standard I had hoped, but they will certainly get the point across. I just want to make sure folks don't take them as an accurate indication of the image quality on the In The Bedroom DVD.


The initial post may load a bit slow at first, since I will probably have to host the posted images myself at for a while, until Parker gets them installed on the HTF server.
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
Alright sports fans, the waiting is over. People can stop hassling me. I finally have it done. Well, I have most of it done. I've finished the discussion for all but two scenes. They are the most interesting scenes in the movie, so don't go away too soon.

I'm fried, so I decided to post Part 1 now and complete it tomorrow. Hopefully I'm not the only who doesn't have a life and is roaming around here on a Saturday night.

I will probably fine tune the images once my my writing is done, so don't fret if the images are a bit over compressed. I will also get the posted images to Parker to hopefully speed up the page load.

Please join in now with anything you have to say about the film......
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
[c]







Press the “Play” button and a sequence of studio graphics appears silently on the screen.
Before the final one appears, soft wind blowing and birds chirping can be heard. The screen
fades to black and remains that way for nearly 15 seconds and the sounds continue, eventually
punctuated by the approaching laughs of a woman. When an image finally does appear....



It shows virtually nothing. The young woman we have been hearing, finally appears in the image,
but only her feet and legs as she runs through the field.




Finally, we see she is being chased by a young man.




By the time the camera has moved high enough for us to see who they are, they have their backs
to the camera, which then moves to another distant shot, once again hiding their identities.




As soon as it seems the camera will show us everything but the couple in the picture,
it suddenly changes to show us the couple and nothing else.






The woman utters “I love it here. I can feel my life.”
Virtually nothing else is said.



This is not a Hollywood love story with the two main characters constantly gushing about
their love and passion for each other. It is subtle and real. Much is left unsaid and unshown.

The young man looks up through the branches of the tree as the camera changes to a wider,
obstructed view of the same tree.




The couple is not visible. In fact, the tree itself is barely visible.



The opening credits begin.
[/c]



I have been involved in Photography my entire life and the one concept regarding it I like most is “Photography is an art of exclusion.” I have no idea where I got it from. One day, it was just there. Photography is nearly the only art form where the end product is less than it began as. A painter starts with an empty canvas and decides how to fill it. A photographer starts with an entire vista, everything in view, and decides what to remove. The filmmakers who made In the Bedroom seem to be saying they intend to visually exclude the audience from as much as possible, while still telling a story. At a time when the purpose of film often seems to be showing as much as possible, more explosions, more action, grand sweeping vistas, bold camera movements, etc. etc. In the Bedroom is refreshing proof that less often is more. Is it obvious I like how this film begins?

As with any film, there ar many topics I could discuss regarding the photography of In the Bedroom, but I am going to focus on exclusion and minimalism. This is a film who’s destination is pretty clear from early on. Because of that, some people find it slow and predictable. I have seen comments about seeing the “twists and turns” coming a mile away, which completely misses the point of this particular journey. The beauty is in the telling and the seeing of this story. The real interest for In the Bedroom is how it takes the viewer one place while the “action” is happening somewhere else. Most of all, it is how the camera seems to physically react in a quite human way to the various moments in the story.


I’ll start with a fairly basic example of how the perception of a character can change, if only subconsciously, based on how he is photographed. When Natalie’s ex husband Richard first shows up, he seems like a decent enough guy...
[c]



If not for the reactions of the people around him.




At first, his size is played down with positioning and low camera angles,




but as soon as he feels threatened, that changes as he starts looming over
the much smaller people around him.




Richard’s next scene, after he has broken into Natalie’s house shows the filmmakers’
resistance to unnecessary camera movements. the discussion between the two starts
with only a moderate degree of tension,



but with Richard much less constricted in the frame than Natalie.




Richard also remains fairly centered, regardless of whether he has his face or back
to the camera, while Natalie is constantly being pushed out the side of the frame.
There are two short moments when Natalie leans forward to assert herself,
only to seemingly recoil immediately afterward.

As the tension in the scene mounts, most films would slowly dolly or zoom in on the
characters, but in this case, the camera stays steady as a rock. It is only late in the scene,
when the pressure hits a peak that the image cuts closer...



but without actual movement during a shot. There is only a slight “jump” as Richard’s
temper hits a high point and he slams his hands on the table. This lack of movement will
present an interesting contrast later in the film.


A scene some time later is another excellent example of how the viewer is kept detached
for the incidents most films would make the focal point. Natalie and Frank are sitting
together in the evening, discussing the various things couples talk about. There are some
nice, peaceful shots of each of them as they talk.




There is a sort of premonition as the camera focuses on an action figure Richard gave to
one of his sons...




as Richard pulls up in his car, off camera.



Natalie and Frank look toward the headlights...




but instead of focusing on Richard and the inevitable trouble he will cause, the camera
switches to a simultaneous scene of Frank’s mother Ruth coaching her school chorus.



It is only after the conclusion of the choir practice that we see the result of Richard’s visit.



As his father Matt cleans the wounds on his face.



End of Part 1.


More to come


[/c]
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
Even though I'm not completely done with my bit on In the Bedroom, I hope people will go ahead and discuss it.

I know the photos don't look all that good. I batch processed them and will be going back to work on them one at a time when I have completed my post.
 

SteveGon

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2000
Messages
12,250
Real Name
Steve Gonzales
Just thought I'd pop in with a recommendation for Atom Egoyan's latest film Ararat which features some very nice photography by Paul Sarossy. :emoji_thumbsup:
 

Andy Olivera

Screenwriter
Joined
Jul 25, 2000
Messages
1,303

Isn't it all in how you look at it? The alternate view is that the photographer takes that vista and decides what to include.

On a seperate note, it occures to me that the only violence in the film that we actually see is Richard's death. Combined with his practically innocent behavior directly prior I can only assume they did it so it would be easier to sympathize with him. Why? I know they wanted to depict him as a multidimensional character, but to not show him at his worst(the very part that earned him his demise) strikes me as overtly manipulative.
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
On a seperate note, it occures to me that the only violence in the film that we actually see is Richard's death. Combined with his practically innocent behavior directly prior I can only assume they did it so it would be easier to sympathize with him. Why? I know they wanted to depict him as a multidimensional character, but to not show him at his worst(the very part that earned him his demise) strikes me as overtly manipulative.
Andy, I see that as being very real. Richard is a manipulative person. The "Hollywood" way to do that scene would be to have him breathing fire and sprouting horns so the audience would want to cheer when he died. In real life, a person like him would probably act very much like Richard did at that moment. "Who me? I wouldn't hurt a fly" that the movie depicts. I've known too many people like that, and that is the way they act. Constantly trying to confuse the people they hurt. Doing just enough good to keep really decent people questioning their feelings.

As far as the concept about photography, it absolutely is just a way of looking at it. That is what makes it a concept. This is also one of the things that is frustrating about photography. Everybody does it, but very few people understand it. Most people do appraoch it from the perspective of "what to have in the picture" with very little thought of what not to have in the picture. How many times has someone said, when looking at a picture they took, "I didn't even see that there when I took the picture?" It happens all the time. The difference between creating an image from the perspective of what to include and the perspective of what to remove is often part of the difference in a snapshot and a piece of art. It is just one piece in the puzzle of elevating the result.
 

Paul_D

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2001
Messages
2,048
I've always considered In the Bedroom a revenge exploitation flick in the manner of Death Wish but without the audience satisfaction. As such it delivers a very simmilar message to Link Removed. While the latter film forces you to literally wallow in the misery of the events, and play them backwards to remove any audience pleasure from the protagonists' revenge on the perpetrator, In the Bedroom deliberately excludes the audience from the key moments of action, and both deliberately avoids demonising the "villain", while focusing on the domestic discord of the victim's family, much of which is only catalysed by the death, not totally created by it.

Considering I see this as the point of the film, the cinematography - the way the camera excludes key narrative elements from the frame, and orders the events favoring typically peripheral elements to the main story - is particularly important.
 

JohnRice

Bounded In a Nutshell
Premium
Reviewer
HW Reviewer
Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2000
Messages
18,900
Location
A Mile High
Real Name
John
It is constantly becoming more interesting to me how I seem to have such a different impression of In the Bedroom from so many others. I do not see an element of revenge, just survival. I see the couple as haunted more than vengeful. One of the more subtle aspects of the movie is how they can't get away from the reminder of Richard. It is only vaguely referenced that Richard's family owns the local cannery, which is the primary source of employment in the town and not only do they see the cannery every day, they can't avoid seeing his name, even if it is just on the side of a truck while they sit eating lunch. Their anger, particularly Annie's, is mostly directed toward Natalie. In fact, after Frank's death, she can't even manange to say Natalie's name, referring to her only as "that girl," while she has no problem talking about Richard.

My interpretation is that what Matt finally does is not out of revenge. He merely decides on the best course of action he can think of and carries it out. In fact, it is quite apparent that a great deal of planning has gone into it, between several people, though we never actually see any of that. Revenge is an extremely passionate act, and Matt is virtually without emotion as he carries out the murder.

I've also seen a lot of comments about how Frank's murder is destructive to his parents' marriage. I see it very differently. In the end it leads to a major catharsis in their lives. Yes, they do have a significant blow up, but the result of it is not (as far as I'm concerned) what I see a lot of people say it is. That is a topic I will be covering when I complete the second part of my discussion, so for now I'll just leave it at that.
 

Agee Bassett

Supporting Actor
Joined
Feb 13, 2001
Messages
922
In the Bedroom ought to be arriving from Netflix any day now. In the meantime, I just wanted to point out that exclusion is central to much of the cinematography/editing in Oliver Twist; particularly in a scene which I will have time for only cursory mention of in my treatise, but which is universally admired in film circles: the scene of Nancy's murder with the dog scratching frantically at the door. Although certainly censorship standards of the time forced Lean to shoot around any graphic depiction of the murder (which involved death by bludgeoning with a heavy cudgel), more saliently the scene as filmed is a manifestation of a maxim Lean always held dear in his filmmaking technique, that "cinema is simply letting the audience fill in the blanks."

If you ask me, this "fill in the blanks" attitude toward cinema is far more effective in producing a mental stimulus in the mind of an audience than the "show everything" technique of Lord of the Rings, among others.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest Articles

Forum statistics

Threads
356,710
Messages
5,121,096
Members
144,146
Latest member
SaladinNagasawa
Recent bookmarks
0
Top