We ended at 29:00 in class.
Your Looking at Movies textbook has a nice quote about Vertov and his film on page 428.
Vertov shows us how to frame reality and movement: through the human eye and the camera eye, or through windows and shutters. But to confound us, he also shows us--through such devices as the freeze-frame, split screen, stop-action, slow motion, and fast motion--how the cinematographer and editor can transform the movements of life into something that is unpredictable. He not only proves that the camera has a life of its own, but also reminds us of the editor, who is putting all of this footage together. Reality may be in the control of the artist, his camera, and its tricks, but it also finds definition within the editor's presentation and, ultimately, the viewer's perception.
In your first well-developed paragraph, please discuss this quote in relation to a five minute piece ofMan With a Movie Camera. Be sure to describe shots cinematically, as if I've never seen the film before. Discuss elements of editing, such as the juxtaposition of shots, rhythm, montage, etc.
In your second well-developed paragraph, discuss this quote in relation to Run Lola Run. Try to be as specific as possible in your descriptions and speak cinematically when you discuss the film.
In the scene starting at 58:28 of Man With A Movie Camera, a person is seen tapping spoons and bottles with spoons to create music. As the scene progresses, shots of people staring happily and laughing are intercut with the shots of the man playing the music. When these shots are separated, they have little meaning, but when they are together, they show that these people are looking at the person playing the music, and smiling and laughing about it. These cuts get more and more rapid until they all last less than one second, and then three separate shots of the man with the spoons, a man's dancing feet and someone playing piano are overlapped onto each other, while a shot of a woman smiling is intercut between them. This surreal use of editing indicates that one man is playing with the spoons while another dances and one more plays the piano, while the woman watches. If these shots had been separated, this meaning could never have been created, but when these shots are put together, they create a very specific meaning. The scene then abruptly cuts to a shot of the people in the film's "audience" looking out at the screen. Shots of a moving camera (shown using stop motion) and smiling audience members are shown. These shots bring to our attention the way that we, the audience, perceive a film and how we will understand it the same way that we would perceive something that is "real" (referencing the scene with the man playing the spoons; the people watching the action happen are affected by it in the same way), as well as how the camera itself perceives it, and also how the editor has to create meaning from what the camera creates.
ReplyDeleteThe quote from the Looking At Movies book also applies very well to Run Lola Run. Through the film's use of split screen, it is able to show the audience two separate actions that are occurring at the same time. If the shots had not been edited together in this way, the audience might not have been able to understand the relation between the two shots being shown. As well, slow motion is used frequently in the film. Slow motion is used to put extra emphasis on certain shots, to show the audience how important the specific moment being shown is, such as the moments where Lola screams out to Manni from across a street while he is entering a convenience store to attempt to rob it. The way that the film is edited drastically changes the viewer's perception of it, and if the editing had been changed even slightly, an entirely new meaning could have been created.
I believe that this quote is very valid for the scene that takes palce from 50:56-55:54. Vertov shows the viewer a believe framing of reality and movement. Many shots in this shot were typical and expected, they showed what they should have shown. For example, there are many shots of regular life activities like a woman practicing rowing, some women playing basketball, men and boys playing soccer (but not together, in different games), some motorcyclists and a merry-go-round. So that you know what I mean by that these activities were shot realistically and believably, let me talk about the basketball scene. All the shots were short and fast paced, they gave enough cinematic space to show what the player is doing and most importantly of all, it focused on the position of the ball and keeps it in focus the whole time. Also, the cuts are appropriate and make it seem more fast paced, which is the feeling a person gets when watching a basketball game. If the camera were replaced by an observer, they would focus on the position of the ball like the camera did. How Vertov decides to confound the viewer is thorugh the cinematography used and the way the shots were edited together. To prove this point, the part in the scene when it shows what looks like a man bench pressing at the beach. This looks normal, but will soon be revealed to be a split screen. The bottom half contains two extended hands grabbing a weight on the ground. When juxtaposed with the top half which contains a man bench pressing. The bottom half, with the two extended arms, looks like the top half's man's legs pressed on the ground. This illusion is broken when the two hands lift the weight out of it's half view and the bottom half shows two feet directly below the top half man's head. This throws the whole shot out of balance (which is what I'm sure Vertov intended) and sends the message that these two halves are not a united shot. This scene also serves as a reminder to the viewers that the editor and cinematographer are present.
ReplyDelete(I had too much and had to cut into sections)
ReplyDeleteThe editor is reminded of, because there are many actions that are only partially completed and become interrupted by a cut to another partially completed action. For example, the part in the scene when there is a shot of a motorcyclist (from behind, LS) driving away from the camera, then a cut to a front view (MS) of a woman on a merry-go-round (camera on the merry-go-round). Se is enjoying herself, but then a cut back to the motorcyclist, but now motorcyclists (there are more now). There are driving (LS) in front of the camera, recorded from behind. Then it cuts back to the merry-go-round (MS) again. This goes on for a while longer, but you get the picture. This makes the viewer realize that this is a world shown by the editor, who determines what is shown and how long and what order. The cinematographer is reminded of, because there are shots when he is directly shown recording shots that have already been shown. To give you an example, the part in the scene when the motorcyclists are driving, it has in a shot of two, the cinematopgher driving a motorcycle and he has the camera strapped on e front. This shows the viewer how the cinematographer got the shots of the motorcyclists driving that were already shown. Same for the merry-go-round woman. There is a shot shown (not on the merry-go-round) of the cinematographer in front of the woman who was shown before. He is recording her from another spot on the merry-go-round. Reality is defined in this scene as crazy and unpredictable and a reality when many different events happen at the same time. This is because there are many different cuts (like in the scenes previously described) and the juxtapositions of shots shown (like in the scenes previously described) seem to have a relationship between them because they could be happening at the same time, due to the parallel editing. My personal reality was that Vertov wanted to show reality from a unique perspective and show the capabilities cinematography and editing are capable of (at this time films were still new and in an experimental stage).
This is almost the exact same case for "Run Lola Run", because a similar style of cinematography and editing was used. For example, there are many cases in the movie when Lola is running to try to save Manni, it shows her running from different angles (generally close ups, but varied to some long shots and bird eye shots, side views, front views) and she may encounter a person who then disrupts the action of Lola running to show a bunch of pictures of that persons future. Lola was running (the first time) to save Manni and she encountered some nuns who she ran through. Before she ran through the nuns, it showed Lola running through a side view or a frontal view, but when she ran through the nuns there is a more discontinuity to her action, because the camera shakes from side to side to make the viewer experience what Lola's going through trying to weave through the nuns. After that there is a man in a bike asking her if she wants to buy it.. It shows a side view of Lola running, and a front view of the man biking. When he leaves after she denies to buy the bike, it then cuts to a montage of photos of his future which show him getting beaten up and then finding his future wife and getting married (a happy ending, isn't it). It then cuts back to the action of Lola running. The editor is definitely reminded of, because this scene (and the whole movie) relies o. The editor to make the appropriate cuts and choose an appropriate length for each shot. Reality in this scene (and the whole movie) is defined as chaotic and random just like "Man with a Movie Camera". It is unpredictable as well. This is evident by the three outcomes of Lola's attempt to save Manni which include the first outcome ending in her death (shot accidentally by a cop) the second attempt ends in Manni being ran over by an ambulance, and the third one ends happily (they both live). These two movies are quite similar in technique.
ReplyDeleteMan With A Movie Camera is, in its essence, a film about the art of filmmaking and how the individual elements of film creation come together to make a film. Man With a Movie Camera achieves this by unraveling and intentionally allowing the audience to take a peak inside the making of the film. At 20:10, we are shown a group of men riding horse and carriages. Soon it cuts to another camera, where we see the cameraman filming the scene we saw before (he appears on the far left of a wide shot). Editing then gives us what is seen through both lenses, cutting between a close up of the carriages and a very wide shot of the cameraman trailing the carriages. At 22:00 the frame freezes on a shot of a horse running. We then see a series of freeze frames until, at 22:23, we see a close up of a strip of film. The way the freeze frames cut to a strip of film implies that we have been viewing shots being put together. We are then seen close ups of several tools of a film editor including a shelf full of film. The editing of the shots implies their use in the construction of the very film we have been watching. The fast rhythm of the editing allows the audience to experience all aspects of the film without really questioning what's going on - we understand through the editing that we are seeing a scene as well as the filming of said scene, and then that we are seeing the construction of the film itself.
ReplyDeleteRun Lola Run uses editing in a very original way, in order to make moments suspenseful, gripping and disorienting. Several moments, like Lola and her boyfriend talking on the phone, are inflicted with much drama thanks to the editing. As the intensity of the conversation escalates, the editing moves much more quickly until the two become a blur. This is broken when Lola howls at her boyfriend to "SHUT UP!". Moments like these are made much more powerful due to their manic style of editing.
57:54-1:03:00
ReplyDeleteBlatantly defying any sort of narrative structure, Man with a Movie Camera is a celebration of the potential of filming and film editing. Essentially its pure indulgence-every effect, shot, edit, angle, etc. imaginable is utilized It is an experiment both in presentation and the effect it has on the viewer. Juxtaposed shots often have no relation to each other though incidentally a meaning is created by way of the Kuleshov effect (though, paradoxically enough, since Vertov purports to reject any story or characterization the word “meaning” is misleading). In a sequence that is perhaps meant to correlate with the film’s theme of Marxist industrialization in some way or is perhaps just another masturbatory montage of shots, a number of different events are spliced together in a parallel edit: a man clinks spoons against tall wine bottles, along an old washboard, and against other spoons while in spliced shots, various groups of characters in different settings are seen laughing and smiling. This juxtaposition sets a convivial tone for the scene. Despite the fact that every subject/group of subjects in each shot is in a different setting, somehow one is given the sense that they are all watching the man with the spoons and enjoying his music. This sets a paradox for the viewer: while they know that in reality the characters are not watching the spoon-man, inevitably they have the contrary impression that they are all simultaneously observing him. This is explored again forthwith as a scene with a living movie camera of sorts is spliced with the “reactions” of the theater audience. This time bemused smiles and laughing faces are replaced with grim, deep-set frowns, setting a far more solemn tone. The exploitation of this forces the viewer to see the dynamic role of the editor in the way that they perceive a film.
Run Lola Run also employs, seemingly, every effect that would be appropriate and imaginable. In a parallel edit, the editor correlates the drawn out return of a telephone to its cradle with Lola’s thought process. He plays on our association of the tintinnabulation of a bell with a character getting an idea to imply that such a thing has happened to Lola. In one shot, we see the phone begin its descent, and then in a series of shots the camera draws closer and close to Lola’s face with increasing pace and intensity until . . . the phone dings. By this effect the editor has both elicited a thrill for the viewer and implied a meaning through a filmic convention. And above all, he has drawn attention to the power of his art.