In Production class this week we looked at how a director might take a book, a piece of text and adapt it for the screen, in this case we looked at an extract from The Big Sleep, Novel by Raymond Chandler film by Howard Hanks.
We looked at the very first scene of the film/book and given an hour to make our own story boards. Then we looked at how Hanks had changed the scene so that it was appropriate for the film, which bits he left out, which bits he needed to keep in and bits that he dramatised.
For instance he took out the description of the outside of the house, such as the garage and descriptions of the inside, the stain glass window and the cherub fireplace. They are not needed, instead we have Marlowe look at a family crest which gives more significance to the family he is about to meet.
Hanks also changes Miss Sternwoods action and clothing, making her more promiscuous, in the book she comes from a room under the stairs and in the film Hanks has her come down the stairs, a couple of people in class did the same change, explaining that if she came down the stairs we can start of by seeing he legs making her more sexualised and attractive for Marlowes character. Hanks also gives her a skirt instead of trousers feminising her and again giving her more of an appeal to Marlowe. In the novel we can hear what Marlowe is thinking, however in the film the audience needs to be shown the appeal of Sternwoods because they are not given that first person intimacy that the book offers.
Story boarding is very useful in film making as when a director makes the storyboard the rest of the crew (especially the cameramen/ cinematographers) can see exactly what shot the director wants and it means that the shoot is set out specifically and that when it comes to shooting there will be no questions as to where the camera should be positioned causing time wasting.
I found the exercise very interesting and fun and it also helped me understand why directors cut out certain bits from books and the choices they make in adding scenes or even little details into their movies.
Sunday 13 November 2011
Excalibur 1981
John Boorman clearly is a very visual director, concentrating on the aesthetics and mise on scene of the film rather than the story and characters.
The Story of Excalibur and Arthur, king of the round table follow closely to the rules of The hero with a thousand faces. Arthur of course is the hero who becomes king because of the things surrounding him, he really has no input into the matter, he is born into his character, so he becomes King. Merlin is introduced, as the helper or guide, Arthur is separated from his family, his brother and father, then takes over the kingdom.
The film goes on like this and it gives the audience a sense of reassurance, we know this story.
Arthur is tested over and over again; must defeat Lancelot, get the bride, find the grail and defeat his evil incest son.
Because of the films structure it was easy to place people in certain roles according to The Heroes Journey. However for me the Characters motives were sometimes unclear, Lancelot fort for Guinevere, to protect her innocence but then they ended up committing the very crime they had denied. Merlin seemed to turn up in random places and it was unclear why sometimes he could use magic and other he could not, thus letting Morgana take over. If they had all been a bit more careful and controlled non the bad stuff would of happened. But then there would be no film.
The film is visually interesting, There is always a lot to look at and especially towards the end the movie which becomes very dark, the mise en scene reflects the dark themes of the film with fog and quite haunting images such as the unfortunate knights that end up as bird food hanging from trees.
The costumes too are something to take note of, especially Morgana's. Her clothes become more and more elaborate as she increases in power (not to mention more revealing).
But again the costumes could become confusing as with the knights, all wearing knights costumes of course, which at times made it hard to tell who was who! Especially when most of them had beards!
Overall the film was very exciting and interesting to watch, and bearing in mind the film was made in the early 80's it was a good watch and I would love to watch more films by Boorman.
The Story of Excalibur and Arthur, king of the round table follow closely to the rules of The hero with a thousand faces. Arthur of course is the hero who becomes king because of the things surrounding him, he really has no input into the matter, he is born into his character, so he becomes King. Merlin is introduced, as the helper or guide, Arthur is separated from his family, his brother and father, then takes over the kingdom.
The film goes on like this and it gives the audience a sense of reassurance, we know this story.
Arthur is tested over and over again; must defeat Lancelot, get the bride, find the grail and defeat his evil incest son.
Because of the films structure it was easy to place people in certain roles according to The Heroes Journey. However for me the Characters motives were sometimes unclear, Lancelot fort for Guinevere, to protect her innocence but then they ended up committing the very crime they had denied. Merlin seemed to turn up in random places and it was unclear why sometimes he could use magic and other he could not, thus letting Morgana take over. If they had all been a bit more careful and controlled non the bad stuff would of happened. But then there would be no film.
The film is visually interesting, There is always a lot to look at and especially towards the end the movie which becomes very dark, the mise en scene reflects the dark themes of the film with fog and quite haunting images such as the unfortunate knights that end up as bird food hanging from trees.
The costumes too are something to take note of, especially Morgana's. Her clothes become more and more elaborate as she increases in power (not to mention more revealing).
But again the costumes could become confusing as with the knights, all wearing knights costumes of course, which at times made it hard to tell who was who! Especially when most of them had beards!
Overall the film was very exciting and interesting to watch, and bearing in mind the film was made in the early 80's it was a good watch and I would love to watch more films by Boorman.
Monday 7 November 2011
Three Point Lighting
Here is a simple image of the three point lighting system.
You have your Key light which lights the subject/s with the Fill light creating depth and the backing light separating the actor/tress from the background.
Although lighting creates a lot of problems, Shadows can be controlled, but with a lot of difficulty. Lighting is used to create depth, to create an illusion, to let the audience know what time of day or even year it is.
Having the Key light and the Fill light cross can create multiple shadows and if the actor has two shadows this can make the shot look fake, set like. Simple things like bringing the subject further away from the wall can hide the shadows.
Lights can also be used to create emotion in a character.
Today we looked at paintings from the famous artists Rembrandt and Vermeer, two artists which use light to create shadows and depth to their subjects.
The two are referenced in film making today and their work has influenced lighting in many films.
Of course there are many other techniques other than the 3 point lighting but this is one that is simple and effective.
Silent to Sound
1927, Sound hits the big screen for the first time in The Jazz Singer, Alan Crosland directs Al Jolson pursuing his dream of becoming a Jazz Singer.
Of course the Sound isn't of the standard we are used to today, it was still a massive break through in cinema history that would change the way films were made forever.
The Silent era would eventually come to an end, people like Chaplin and Keaton had to change their styles.
Thats not to say Chaplin wasn't successful after the progression of sound, but there were many more silent directors/actors who were not cut out for sound.
Sound came with other problems, directors now had to incorporate microphones into their movies, how would they be put out of shot, how would the actors move around the set. They had to use actors with accents that could be easily understood by an audience and actually make sure the dialogue fitted the movement.
Hitchcock's Blackmail 1929 dubs its actress and dubbing was a big way of getting around most of sounds problems. Blackmail was only two years after the Jazz singer and yet the progression is great, we go from songs to straight dialogue, but it would be a long time until sound became as natural as it is today.
A great example we were shown in class of the difficulties sound posed is Singin' in the Rain which directly humours the problems. We have the actors becoming frustrated with the microphones and the director becoming frustrated with them, the loop goes on and then we are shown the finished product, which ends up disastrous because of sound.
In class we have had our own difficulties with sound, positioning the actors so that they share a mic or picking up unwanted sound, if we film indoors we can get an echo, but there are ways to over come these problems, just as they were overcome when sound was first introduced.
Of course the Sound isn't of the standard we are used to today, it was still a massive break through in cinema history that would change the way films were made forever.
The Silent era would eventually come to an end, people like Chaplin and Keaton had to change their styles.
Thats not to say Chaplin wasn't successful after the progression of sound, but there were many more silent directors/actors who were not cut out for sound.
Sound came with other problems, directors now had to incorporate microphones into their movies, how would they be put out of shot, how would the actors move around the set. They had to use actors with accents that could be easily understood by an audience and actually make sure the dialogue fitted the movement.
Hitchcock's Blackmail 1929 dubs its actress and dubbing was a big way of getting around most of sounds problems. Blackmail was only two years after the Jazz singer and yet the progression is great, we go from songs to straight dialogue, but it would be a long time until sound became as natural as it is today.
A great example we were shown in class of the difficulties sound posed is Singin' in the Rain which directly humours the problems. We have the actors becoming frustrated with the microphones and the director becoming frustrated with them, the loop goes on and then we are shown the finished product, which ends up disastrous because of sound.
In class we have had our own difficulties with sound, positioning the actors so that they share a mic or picking up unwanted sound, if we film indoors we can get an echo, but there are ways to over come these problems, just as they were overcome when sound was first introduced.
The Decameron 1971
Pier Paolo Pasolini's film The Decameron is a series of short stories from Bocaccio's "Decameron".
Most of the Stories have been adapted for the screen, In MDA1800 we discussed how the story of the Lisabetta who planted her dead lovers head in a basil plant was changed for the screen.
Pasolini changes the ending of the story, in the real version she dies, her brothers find the head and that's the end of the story. However in the film we are left with her tenderly looking after the plant as if things could be okay for her once more. This gives the audience a completely different view of the story, they could be left wanting more, wondering if the sister will ever move on. If Pasolini had decided to keep the original ending her death would leave the story closed, the audience doesn't need to think about it any more. There are other changes he makes too, such as the discovery of the Lisabettas affair by one of her brothers. In the film he is sleeping with a woman just as she is sleeping with Lorenzo, This makes the brother look hypocritical, the audience can see the sexism of that time and relate to Lisabetta as she is abused by her brothers. Another interesting addition is the reaction of one of the other brothers, When he is told of his sisters affair his reaction is over the top to say the least. In class we discussed how this could either be because he is in love with the sister or even Lorenzo. It all adds to the story becoming about sexual double standards rather than that of love and lose.
The other stories in the Decameron all carry the same messages, Sex seams to defeat all other interests, even Religion.
Most of the Stories have been adapted for the screen, In MDA1800 we discussed how the story of the Lisabetta who planted her dead lovers head in a basil plant was changed for the screen.
Pasolini changes the ending of the story, in the real version she dies, her brothers find the head and that's the end of the story. However in the film we are left with her tenderly looking after the plant as if things could be okay for her once more. This gives the audience a completely different view of the story, they could be left wanting more, wondering if the sister will ever move on. If Pasolini had decided to keep the original ending her death would leave the story closed, the audience doesn't need to think about it any more. There are other changes he makes too, such as the discovery of the Lisabettas affair by one of her brothers. In the film he is sleeping with a woman just as she is sleeping with Lorenzo, This makes the brother look hypocritical, the audience can see the sexism of that time and relate to Lisabetta as she is abused by her brothers. Another interesting addition is the reaction of one of the other brothers, When he is told of his sisters affair his reaction is over the top to say the least. In class we discussed how this could either be because he is in love with the sister or even Lorenzo. It all adds to the story becoming about sexual double standards rather than that of love and lose.
The other stories in the Decameron all carry the same messages, Sex seams to defeat all other interests, even Religion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)