Experimental Film

Experimental movies have completely changed my outlook on what the definition of film is. Before watching these clips, I had a very stereotypical mindset of what the typical Hollywood movie was. If I had watched a clip such as the ones presented in class, I would have never thought to consider it a piece of film or art. The Avant-Garde film I chose was “Her Morning Elegance” music video by Oren Lavie and Merav Nathan. This clip especially caught my attention because of the form in which it was done. First of all, I thought the use of photographic frames was outstanding and key to the overall mood of the video. The quick jerky jumps and movements we get from the characters and objects in the video are what make this film an experimental journey. I thought it was very innovative in the sense that I had never seen a music video done this way, creating a whole new reality based upon still photographs. I also thought it was very interesting the way through which the producers were able to recreate certain content from the song. For example, the song talks about a storm. In the video we observe how Lavie and Nathan are able to create this stormy setting through photographs and the careful placing of objects around the main character. Overall, this clip has definitely changed my perception on the notion of experimental film and art.  

            In my opinion, I do think that our generation views experimental videos completely different from other generations. The main reason as to why this is, in my opinion, is the availability of this form of art to a large audience. I think our generation is more aware and open to this new type of film because it has become main stream and in a way “cool.” Once something becomes main stream and open to the public, we begin to accept it more rapidly because of the influence of those around us. For previous generations, since these types of films were only shown to specific targeted audiences, it might have been thought of as taboo. They might have thought of this type of art and film as “weird” and unusual because very few people understood and knew about it. It is more widely accepted today not because the content has changed, but because it is easily circulated throughout the world.

The Hurt Locker

As the scene opens, a quote written in white letters appears on the contrasting black screen. The quote, by Chris Hedges, reads “The rush of battle if often a potent and lethal addiction, for war is a drug.” Most of the quote then fades away and only the ominous warning “war is a drug” is left remaining. The scene then cuts to what appears to be a point of view shot quickly moving through rocky and sandy terrain. As it moves, we almost become part of the setting, exploring the unknown as we are unable to see which way we are headed. We soon realize that the point of view shot comes from a moving robot, as the scene cuts to several camera angles following the machine. As we follow the robot, people running come into the frame. The camera begins to follow them using a technique of quick zooming in and out; mimicking the quick eye movement of what could be the bystanders. Through the use of high angle shots, we are able to better see the seemingly chaotic surroundings. There are people screaming, fighting, running. It is a sight of chaos and desperation, apparent through the expressions of those in the scene. As the army tanks begin to appear, a swish pan shot is used in order to move from one focus point to the next, greater emphasizing the idea that we in fact are bystanders. Throughout the scene, rapid shots composed of quick zooming are apparent. Suddenly, everything becomes quiet and all we hear are the soldiers talking. Medium close-up shots are used in order to depict their concentration and decision making as they stare what seems to be a bomb through the screen.  We also continue seeing point of view shots from the robot, further increasing the intensity we feel because of the proximity of the bomb to us. As the suited up soldier begins to move towards the bomb, we experience his point of view through the headset. The cameras used are obviously handheld cameras, many times the shots being humanly shaky. As the soldier is walking back, one of the other soldiers spots an Iraqui holding a phone. The camera begins to move rapidly from one angle to another, creating concern and dramatic effects. There is a close up shot of the man pressing the numbers, immediately followed by the explosion of the bomb. Interestingly enough, the explosion shot is done in slow motion. We are able to see the detail of the rocks rising, the rust of the car moving, and the soldier falling to his death.

            In my opinion, Katherine Bigelow completely changes the form and essence of the movie when she changes the setting to the grocery store. To begin with, we do not experience intense point of view shots as we did before. Instead, most of the shots are done through pretty steady cameras; they do not appear to be shaky or handheld. In a way, the intensity and chaos of the war are no longer experienced because of the way through which this scene is shot. When the main character is standing in the aisle staring at the cereal, we do not in any way whatsoever experience the swish pan zooming in and out shots done before. Instead, the camera focuses on him staring at the wide variety of cereal, one long continuous shot. In my opinion, the form in which this movie is shot has a tremendous effect on the depiction and creation of intensity and chaotic elements essential to the successful portrayal of war and its components.

Shark in the Head

At first, it was difficult for me to pick a particular scene in the movie that stood out simply because they are all in some way or another connected to the main theme of setting in Shark in the Head. One scene that really impacted me depicted the little girl and the chalk drawings on the side walk. The scene starts off with a girl about five to six years old bending over drawing pictures while the main character watches her from his window. He is dressed in a tank top and his boxers. He is smiling while admiring her artwork; it is clear that he is in an amiable mood. The shot then cuts to him coming outside and bending next to her while she keeps drawing. Immediately after we see the girl’s guardian take her away, not before handing him the chalk. As he leans against the wall, we experience what seems to be a point-of-view shot. There is an image of a green tree, seemingly left unfinished by the girl. As we watch, the tree begins to move as it is colored in and finished by what seems to be no one. This same pattern is seen with an image of a rooster. At first, we think that perhaps the main character is imagining the completion of these drawings. We then see however, that the images are being washed away at night because of the rain. Were the images ever completed in reality or just his imagination? This is completely open to interpretation. By doing this Maria Prochazkova is deviating from the traditional depictions of setting seen in Hollywood where everything is delivered to the viewer with no room for creativity or deep thought. In my opinion, this moment definitely contributes to the mise-en-scene because of the visual elements it has in common with the other scenes. The bright colors, contrasts, camera movements, and reactions of the actor of this scene match the others.

            It is clear from the beginning that this movie does not follow the classical paradigm. Even though it seems to follow some what of a chronological order, the opposite could be argued because of the incoherence of the scenes. The diegesis of the movie itself at times seems as if it were non-diegetic because of the unrealistic aspect of the images. In my opinion, the film does achieve style. It is clear that the director is not concerned on how the story is told. In a way there are no smooth transitions or in fact real connection between events and what we see on screen. We do pay much attention, however, to the details within each segment of the story. Much thought is put into every single detail, from the clothes he is wearing to the color of his room. These details work together with the mise-en-scene to create the overall theme of the movie.

Full Metal Jacket Review

http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9B0DE6DB133BF935A15755C0A961948260

The review on Full Metal Jacket by the New York Times tends to focus mostly on the director and how he created the film rather than the actual plot synopsis. Vincent Canby opens the review by talking about the style of the director and how he usually tends to deviate from the traditional style and narrative form of movies. We talked about this type of narrative in class; films that do not follow the classical paradigm. I thought it was interesting that Canby talked about how the movie may anger and puzzle the audiences due to its style and disorder. It is true that people tend to get angry/not like a movie because it has an inconclusive ending. The review does briefly talk about the plot of the movie and the setting. It gives some insight into the idea that it is a war movie and there is tragedy and violence. Canby also talks about the sarcasm of certain lines in the movie that are intended to create more irony and tension within the film. I thought it was very interesting that the review also compared this movie to some previous works by the same director. It made sure to let the reader know that Kubrick did not change his style of films; where disorder is the path to order. I had mixed feelings about the review. It was definitely a positive piece on Kubrick and his film. The way Canby described it, however, did not necessarily appeal to me. When I read the review, the first impression I had was one of complete chaos. It seemed to me like the film had no real order and that bothered me. I tend to like movies that have conclusive endings or that have some type of resolution. In my opinion, this movie had neither. Even though the movie had a very good review, the stylistic and structural aspects described did not fulfill my expectations.