Looking Back

As a person who is not very tech-savvy, I have found that this class has paved a very useful foundation for my knowledge of different types of media. I have learned basics about film, photography and web design that will be useful in my education as a film major. Since I am a film major, I found that I favored some lectures more than others at first (i.e. those that dealt exclusively with film related topics) like learning about cameras and the ways in which they function. I really enjoyed the labs where we got to use the cameras to record. But as the semester progressed, my biases wore off because I realized that everything we learned applied to me as a filmmaker. Though at first I was turned off a bit by the computer related lectures, I soon came to realize that as a filmmaker in today's world, knowing all these things will be very useful if not necessary.
I really understand the concept of media convergence now. Knowing how to effectively use computers and the web is not only essential to web designers or people who work in computer related fields, but also to filmmakers now because of the roles that things like the Internet have taken on in different mediums. Today, computers are essential for filmmakers in areas like editing and even exhibition, since today movies can be seen over the web. Even things like designing dvd covers and posters to advertise one's film requires knowledge on how to effectively use computers. In addition to all this, I learned that some things can cross medium boundaries. For example, things like knowing design principles is not only useful to a web designer, but also to filmmakers who have to soundly compose their shots. I've learned a lot about how different mediums are coming closer together with the technology available to us today.
The lecture/lab split worked really well for this class. Learning about things in a strictly theoretical manner can get very boring. The lab section of the class, however, reinforced what we learned in the lectures in a more practical, hands-on experience. This type of reinforcement is not only more enjoyable than strictly learning material without actually practicing it, but it makes it easier to remember what we learn since we are actually engaging in it. Overall, I found the class to be very useful to me as a media maker and I am looking forward to taking the second half of the class next semester.

Extra Credit- Darius Khondji's Work in Se7en

Darius Khondji's cinematographic work in David Fincher's film "Se7en" is outstanding. Its difficult to pick a point where to begin, but the element that stuck out most to me about the film's cinematography was chiaroscuro, or the contrast of lights and shadows. The film as a whole, has a very dark, moody feel to it in terms of cinematography and it works perfectly for a film about a dark, coarse subject matter. Se7en is about two detectives working a series of linked murder cases in a gritty urban scene; Dharius Khondji captures the atmosphere surrounding the story perfectly through his cinematography.

The physical darkness being captured could serve several different purposes in this film beside simply representing the mood of the film. The harsh shadows that are often thrown on Morgan Freeman's face can be interpreted as symbolic of his character's mindset; he plans on retiring from the police force, but the darkness represents his uncertainty in his decision. During the dinner scene between Somerset (Freeman), Mills (Pitt), and Tracy (Paltrow), Somerset's face has harsh shadows on it, while Mills' and Tracy's don't. Somerset's outlook on the city (and the world as represented by the microcosmic city) is a very pessimistic one; after years of chasing criminals, Somerset feels a hopelessness for humanity. The shadows that are often cast on his face can also represent his bleak outlook on life.


There are many other scenes where the lighting is done extremely well in the film, I'll point out a couple. Lighting is used to make the scene where the SWAT team is heading up to room 306 (where they think the murderer is) look amazing. The main source of light comes from the lights attached to the rifles of the SWAT team. The combination of low and high camera angles used during this scene also amplify the feeling of tension as they approach the apartment. The use of a red light during the "Lust" murder (of the prostitute) also serves as an example of good lighting technique. The red light not only works as metaphoric for the red light district, but it also creates a feeling of danger and excitement that add to the tension rising as they get further into the murders.

The rift between Somerset and Mills (the sagacious verteran and the impulsive rookie) comes through in the way that Khondji films their scenes together. An example of one such scene is when the two are sitting on opposite sides of the frame as they argue whether or not the murderer is a lunatic. The composition of the shot, having Somerset on one end of the frame and Mills on the other represents the gap that exists between the two because of their difference in views. This occurs once again during a pan after the interrogation scene- during the pan we see Somerset alone in one interrogation room and then Mills alone in the next, emphasizing their literal and metaphoric separation.

My favorite shot, in terms of composition, is when the murderer has the gun to Mill's head. A low camera angle and a close up are used to capture Mill's expression as the water drips from his face (like tears). Then there is a shot of the murderer standing over Mills, with the gun in full focus and the murderer out of focus. It is a very ominous shot that captures suspense and tension very well-- something that Khondji is able to do successfully throughout the entire film.

Design I Like: Full Metal Jacket's Cover Art

COVER VERSION 1

Version 1 of the design on the cover of the "Full Metal Jacket" DVD perfectly complements Stanley Kubrick's film. Regarding it from an aesthetic perspective, it works very well for several reasons when compared to the version below (cover version 2).

COVER VERSION 2

The first thing that stuck out to me was the alignment in both versions of the cover. The alignment of the images and words in both versions are centered. In version 1, however, we get the title of the film all in one line so that as our eyes travel down from that point, the rest of the cover seems to get narrower. It is basically presented as an upside down triangle, with the largest side of the triangle being represented by the title which leads us toward the tip of the triangle, which in this case is the soldier in the center of the picture. In version 2, the title spans four lines and is too neatly aligned with the rest of the image on the cover. Basically, version 2 is too symmetrically centered whereas version 1 establishes balance without keeping everything too lined up.
Part of the problem with lining everything up like it is done in version 2 is that it creates the unpleasing white spaces on the sides of the cover. Those white spaces can be put to better use, as is done in version 1 by filling them in with a jungle background. Part of what pleases me so much about version 1 is the use of color. The colors are not bright nor vivid, instead they are dark and bleak; creating the sense that the film's content will also be somberly blunt. The use of green and black as the primary colors emphasize the idea of a dark war being fought in a jungle terrain.
The typography in both versions is also noticeably different. I don't at all like the curves of the thick block letters in version 2. Size wise they take up too much space, font wise they don't complement the film as well as the letters used in version 1. In version 1, the title is not overwhelmingly large, because it does not have to be. It uses sleek transparent letters against the green background, which are filled in in a coarse manner with tinges of green.

I like the use of the helmet in both versions; it shows how the animosity of war (in the form of the bullets and the phrase "Born to Kill") overwhelms the tiny peace symbol on the side. It creates the sense that peace is marginalized in the midst of war. The font used for the "Born to Kill" phrase works well because it appears to be hand written. To add to the idea that the phrase is "hand-written," the letter I in the word kill is left in its lower case form as opposed to all the other upper case letters in the phrase.
Ultimately, the reason why I prefer version 1 over version 2 is because it better complements the actual film. Take for example the use of the helmet: in version 2 the helmet stands alone and its meaning is limited because of this, but when put in the context of version 1 it takes on more meaning. The fact that the helmet now covers a soldier's face becomes a focal point in cover 1. The helmet does not lose its importance in cover 1, instead it gains more focus by being placed in the direct center of the cover. Once placed on the soldier's head, it creates the idea of anonymity for the soldier; an idea central to the film which uses nicknames as opposed to proper names for its central characters. War, in essence, creates anonymity. The film explores the idea that a soldier is more than just a soldier and that they lose bits and pieces of themselves as they delve further into their service. The film also tackles the issue of anonymity as it applies to the enemies fought. Soldiers are pushed to think of enemies in a very general sense: enemies cannot be human, they have to be nameless creatures. That is what makes killing them easier for the soldier. "Full Metal Jacket" is a spectacular movie that delves into the soldier's psyche to explore these themes and it is only fitting that its cover be just as spectacularly insightful.

"What I See" in Rear Window

Alfred Hitchcock once said that "there is a distinct difference between suspense and surprise." To Hitchcock, suspense was about involving the audience in a scene and creating anxiety within that scene, usually by having them see something which a character in the film could not see. Hitchcock is now considered a master of creating suspense within cinema and in a film like Rear Window it can be seen why. In a nutshell, Rear Window is about a photographer who is stuck at home because of an injury, begins to spy on his neighbors, discovers a possible murder and tries to gather evidence (with the help of his girlfriend) to prove the murder occurred.
Audience involvement plays a large part in the creation of Hitchcockian suspense and it is rather simple to achieve in a film where the main theme is voyeurism, a topic that easily lends itself both to viewer association (in that we are in a sense voyeurs when we view the lives of others through cinema) and to suspense. The voyeuristic tendencies of the protagonist Jefferies (played by James Stewart) are emphasized throughout the film by the use of subjective point of view editing. Many times we get a shot of Jefferies, then a shot of what he sees, and lastly a shot of his reaction. There are even some scenes where Jefferies uses a camera with a telephoto lens attached to get a closer look at the subjects of his spy work. In these scenes, the frame is changed to a circular one and a telephoto lens is actually used to create the sense that we are seeing exactly what Jefferies is seeing. By giving us these point of view shots, Hitchcock limits our scope to Jefferies' perspective. It is as though the camera is not actually a camera, but Jefferies' eyes. Another way in which the camera acts as Jeffries' eyes is through pans and tilts. Whenever Jefferies surveys a scene, the camera either pans or tilts in the direction which his eyes are moving.
As a result of this, the audience is pushed to connect with Jefferies because we are seeing what he sees. Another reason why we connect with him is that we get a lot of close ups of Jefferies as opposed to the long shots we get of the antagonist Thorwald. By keeping Jeffries closer to the camera and Thorwald farther, Hitchcock creates a more intimate relationship between the viewer and Jefferies and a more distant relationship between the viewer and Thorwald. Hitchcock continually involves the audience with Jefferies' world by giving them access to private things that should not be seen (by neither Jefferies nor the audience). An interesting note about framing can be made when Jefferies looks in on his neighbors and views them through their windows. These windows act as a frame to the events which Jefferies is looking in on, creating a sense that these events are framed for Jeffries to watch as the film is framed for the viewer to watch. The windows are frames within the frame of the film, yet another link between Jeffries and the viewer of the film.
There is a scene in the film which demonstrates how brilliantly, yet simply, Hitchcock is able to create suspense within the film. Lisa (played by Grace Kelly) breaks into Thorwald's apartment in order to gather evidence. As Lisa is in the apartment, we see Thorwald walking up the steps to his apartment within the same frame. By juxtaposing these two simple scenarios, Hitchcock is able to create immediate suspense through composition. The viewer sees Thorwald and knows Lisa does not. Immediately the viewer begins to wonder whether Lisa will be caught or not and what will happen if she is. The fact that this is all being witness from the point of view of Jefferies from the apartment across adds to the voyeuristic "feel" of the film. Through such a manner, Hitchcock is able to capture the suspense of voyeurism in Rear Window.

Museum of the Moving Image

I remember being to the Museum of the Moving Image when I was younger and having loved it the first time I was there. So it came as no surprise that I really enjoyed this second trip to the museum. I was really amazed to see how far the technology surrounding moving images has come over the last century or so. Viewing the thaumatrope and zoetrope made witnessing the Feral Fount exhibit that much more impressive. It was amazing to see how something as elaborate as the Feral Fount evolved from something as simple as thaumatropes and zoetropes; the Feral Fount works in the same basic way: displaying the still images and incorporating the flickering light to make the still images seem as they are moving.
The automated dialogue replacement exhibit was pretty cool; I really like hands-on exhibits. I know they might seem boring but my favorite exhibits were the Kinetoscope and The Great Train Robbery exhibits. I've read a lot about the Kinetoscope and actually getting to see one in action was great. Its hard to fathom that the movie technology we use today, like the grand IMAX theatres, began from such humble beginnings as the tiny Peep Shows of the Kinetoscope which only a single person was able to view at a time. I also learned something new about Kinetoscopes from the tour guide: that their nitrate film was flammable, which didn't fare well with the fact that they were made of wood. The reason I liked The Great Train Robbery exhibit is basically the same: its pretty cool to see how cinema has evolved from short, unedited, straightforward narratives to the CGI saturated, intricate plot line films we see today. Seeing The Great Train Robbery in its soundless, black and white simplicity and then comparing it to something like Transformers with its over the top CGI and computer effects really goes to show how far the technology surrounding moving images has come.

Welcome

Welcome to my blog. Hope you're interested in what I've got to say, and if you're not thats too bad. Come back!