This post will deconstruct and evaluate the final scene of Shane Meadow's This Is England based on its thematic elements. The scene can be viewed after the jump.
The theme of the film is that a person's identity changes throughout the
course of their life. This is exemplified in the final scene of the film as Shaun,
who worked so hard throughout the film to fit in with a local gang of skinheads,
tosses the flag they gave him into the sea. This is shown actively throughout
the film as the characters never say
that they're changing. In fact, this scene is the most didactic of any as it’s
quite obvious that Shaun's throwing of the flag marks the end of his
association with the gang, but this isn’t actually stated.
This final scene demonstrates the aforementioned scene through use of
space and movement. Shaun is placed in a vast open, deep space on the sea shore
and is often filmed from a distance or from above in close-ups to make him seem
dwarfed by the landscape around him. Even though this scene is incredibly
personal, he space Shaun occupies on the screen for the beginning of it is
fairly minimal, making the final shot where his face fills the frame all the
more powerful. He is made to seem small and frail in the opening shots, as
though he’s been completely broken by the ordeal he went through over the
course of the film, then in the final three shots we see he has resolved to
frustrated closure and get some hope for his future.
Shaun’s movements
in the scene are slow, but deliberate adding powerful emotion to his actions.
The viewer gets the sense that he knows exactly what he is doing when he brings
the flag to the shore. And the slow sinking of the flag offers a powerful conclusion
to the only fast motion in the scene (the actual throwing). There is time to
save the flag if he wishes, but Shaun (as evidenced by the POV of the shot)
just stands and watches. Had the flag sunk slowly, or worse floated, the theme
of rejection of the past self would not be evident. Thankfully, Meadows made
the flag gracefully sink into the murky water never to be seen again. The
finality of the gesture is clearly shown as the flag disappears and the cut to
Shaun’s unmoving face occurs.
For this post I will be comparing and contrasting stills from Paper Rad's found-footage based psychedelic art film Trash Talking and the animated music video created for Radiohead's "Paranoid Android". The stills are below:
The two stills demonstrate
the very contrasting uses of color between the two pieces. In the Paper Rad
still all of the hues are bright and fluorescent. The only muted color is that
of the bricks, and even that contains some brighter patches to keep it consistent.
These bright colors are one of the many devices Paper Rad use in Trash Talking to give the viewer a feeling
of sensory overload. They attempt to fill the screen almost entirely with the
most bizarre detritus of modern culture in the most dizzying array of
contrasting hues possible to make the viewing experience almost uncomfortable. In
the Radiohead piece however nearly all the hues are pastels or otherwise
saturated, with the exception of the couch which is nearly the same bright
fluorescent red seen in the Paper Rad piece. The saturated colors in this piece
are often used to make even commonplace objects seem disgusting some way. In
fact, the primary goal of the “Paranoid Android” video is to disgust the viewer
by showing them a cartoonized version of modern life portrayed in ugly hues
like mustard yellow and puke green.
The Paper Rad still
displays much more movement than the Radiohead still. The protagonist is
obviously walking across screen, which we can tell by the position of his legs,
but also by the position of his arms which are doing the parallel movement to
walking, an exaggerated swing. If one were to play this clip on they would see
the overlapping movement of his walking in the bouncing of his lump like body
up and down. This gives a notion of weight to his top-heavy frame, which often
keeps bouncing after he stops walking in later scenes. The Radiohead frame on
the other hand shows no motion at all, showing the apathy of the video’s
protagonist who spends a considerable amount of time sitting around in the
early parts of the piece. There are no parallel or overlapping movements here
as there was no primary movement. His slumped position on the floor gives a
feeling of weight to his frame, though it isn’t implied very strongly without
an actual motion.
This post is a storyboarding exercise based on the "By way of the Green Line Bus..." scene from The Royal Tenenbaums, referenced in an earlier post on this blog.
Storyboard
Essay
As per
usual, in the aforementioned scene, director Wes Anderson followed all of the
rules of framing and composition perfectly, which is after all a hallmark of
his style.
Both sequences in this scene follow
the 180 degree rule, though they work around it differently. The first scene,
wherein Richie takes the picture with the fans, follows the rule simply by
dollying down the 180 degree line that is established when the fan first talks
to Richie. Even when other character enter the frame, Anderson continues to
dolly down the original line. In the second sequence, wherein the bus arrives
the camera runs on Richie’s left throughout, starting in front of him to the
left and cutting to a left-side OTS.
This scene is also a perfect
example of the Rule of Thirds as the first four shots are all divided into
meticulously measured vertical thirds. The ground below the characters makes up
the lower third, the characters themselves make up the middle third, and the
space above the actors (divided nicely with the “Royal Arctic Lines” sign)
makes up the upper third. The final shot changes the arrangement into
horizontal thirds, in order to show the disruption Margot’s arrival makes in
Richie’s demeanor. Richie’s shoulder marks the edge of the right third and the
bus ends at the edge of the left and middle thirds.
Finally, Anderson follows the 30
degree rule in shots four and five (shots 1-3 are filmed in one take and thus
are exempt) by cutting from a shot which would be at 30 degrees of Richie
waiting to the over the shoulder shot which would fall around 170 degrees, well
exceeding the “greater than 30 degrees” stipulation of the aforementioned rule.
Wes Anderson is critically
acclaimed for his impeccable framing of shots, with every shot either being
perfectly symmetrical or perfectly arranged into thirds. His perfectly executed
cinematography is often used to make the ridiculous plotlines of his films have
a more natural feeling. The Royal
Tenenbaums is the perfect example of this technique, in which Anderson
creates a beautiful world where everything is visually impeccable, but every
character is absurdly flawed.
The songs I chose are Dexy's Midnight Runners' lone hit single "Come on Eileen" and the ska-punk cover performed by the short-lived, but awesomely named, Save Ferris. The original and the cover are embedded below along with my analyses of each and a comparative essay.
Original Version by Dexy's Midnight Runners
Ska-Punk Cover by Save Ferris
Listening Framework Analyses Original Version
Listening Phase 1 (Rhythm)
Tempo[slow, medium, fast]
Medium
Source[where is the rhythm coming from?]
Upright bass, Banjo, Drums, Piano
Groove[describe how the personality of the rhythm]
Folky, Poppy, Upbeat, Sauntering
Listening Phase 2 (Arrangement)
Instrumentation[which instruments drive the song?]
Emotional
Architecture[Draw how the song build and drop?]
Soft,gentle and reflective intro leads to gradual build of instruments until verse. Verse mounts in pleading intensity to chorus which rolls forcefully into instrumental section and another round of verse/pre-chorus/chorus. Bridge becomes somber as singer is rejected by Eileen yet again, but builds in intensity until a bombastic revival of the chorus when she consents to him.
Listening Phase 3 (Sound Quality)
Balance
-Height [high and low
of frequency]
Full height, with violin, banjo and vocals occupying higher ranges and bass occupying lower. All other instruments fall in the mid-range.
-Width [stereo panning left/right]
No panning.
-Depth[layers of instruments - via loudness]
Considerably deep, with banjo, sax, and piano staying relatively low other than pitch-ins, but violin, bass, drums, and vocals remaining toward the top.
Ska-Punk Cover
Listening Phase 1 (Rhythm)
Tempo[slow, medium, fast]
Medium
Source[where is the rhythm coming from?]
Horns, Guitar, Drums
Groove[describe how the personality of the rhythm]
Gritty, Driving, Swaggering, Swinging
Listening Phase 2 (Arrangement)
Instrumentation[which instruments drive the song?]
Drums, Bass, Guitar, Horns, Vocals
Structure/Organization[how is the song built? Order,
patterns, etc.]
Emotional
Architecture[Draw how the song build and drop?]
Begins forceful and celebratory, vocals come in bringing mood to a slightly more somber twinge. Pre-Chorus builds in defiant punk rock anger. Chorus swings and bops like mid-tempo ska with a guilty happiness. Instrumental section regains punk angst leading into a more angsty version of the prior verse's somber celebration. Pre-Chorus and chorus repeat as before leading into a soft sultry jazzy bridge. Chorus after bridge is true ska-punk full of exuberance leading to loud horn-filled joyous outro with final loving lines in the vocals.
Listening Phase 3 (Sound Quality)
Balance
-Height [high and low
of frequency]
Mid/Low in punkier sections (Bass, low tuned guitar, drums). Mid/High in ska/jazz sections (Higher guitar, horns)
-Width [stereo panning left/right]
Very little width other than occasional doubletracked lead vocal in the chorus.
-Depth[layers of instruments - via loudness]
Bass buried fairly low, horns and vocals toward the top. Guitar is dynamic throughout depending on volume of vocals.
Comparative Essay
The two
versions of “Come On Eileen” are identical in terms of lyrical structure and
follow the exact same vocal melody. In fact, the covers are surprisingly similar
in this regard with the female vocalist of Save Ferris easily mastering the
high pitches that were so impressively sung by the frontman of Dexy’s Midnight
Runners in the original. While the pronouns of the lyrics are changed in Save
Ferris’s cover in order to make the song applicable to a friendship between two
heterosexual females the concept is essentially the same. Likewise, one of the
song’s recognizable pre-chorus (too-ra-loo-ra too-ra-loo-ray-ai) is carried
over almost verbatim from the original to the cover. This string of syllables is “Come On Eileen” and any cover would
feel incomplete without it, thus that familiar melody will truly be stuck in
your head forever.
It’s the instrumental arrangements and
stylings that ultimately set Save Ferris’ cover apart from Dexy’s original
version. Ferris’ rhythms are largely influenced by their chosen genre of
Ska-Punk and thus have much more staccato in some sections and swing in others
than the relatively straight-forward folk rhythms of the original tune. The
intensity of Ferris’ cover is much higher than the original due to the
inclusion of more distorted guitars and the faster punkier instrumental
section. The timbre of the Dexy’s Midnight Runner’s version is relatively
simplistic other than slight distortions on the electric bass; however, the
Save Ferris cover has incredibly complex timbre which changes throughout from
gritty and punky to smooth and jazzy.
Personally,
I find both versions of the song to be equally catchy and interesting to listen
to. On the one hand the original is a round of old-fashioned fun taking classic
folk elements and putting a pop-rock spin on them. On the other hand, the cover
pays loving homage to the original whilst displaying all of the youthful
exuberance and zaniness I’ve grown to love in ska-punk. The similarities in
melody, lyrics, and general structure make it even harder to decide between the
two as I honestly just view them as two really good recordings of a
surprisingly wonderful pop song.
The following post will be based upon the sound design of one of my all-time favorite scenes in cinema, wherein Margot Tenenbaum picks up her brother Richie Tenenbaum at the pier in Wes Anderson's The Royal Tenenbaums.
Below is a transcription of the scene.
The “By
way of the Green Line Bus” scene from The
Royal Tenenbaums wonderfully illustrates the perceptions of space and time
that can be created through the use of sound.
Space is conveyed through the use of echo, panning, and
varied levels which create a sense of vastness on the pier and emulates the
camera’s distance from the actors. A slight echo on the footsteps of the
pedestrians and on the ships’ horns which blow throughout the scene give the
sense of a large pier off-screen. And the panning of the sound of footsteps and
luggage carts is used to convey the movement of the extras through the space
even after they move off-screen, giving a sense of directionality to the sound
and a horizontal vastness to the space of the pier. Thirdly, the lowered levels
of the actors’ microphones during dialogue and the raising and lowering levels
of wind and car noise put the spectator in the camera’s perspective and enhance
the distance between the camera and Ritchie when he is talking to the fans.
Time is conveyed through sound primarily when the passage of
time slows down as Margot gets off the bus. The ambient sounds of the pier and
the street fade out, as she gets off symbolizing the slowing down of time. It
becomes obvious through the cut to Ritchie however that this is more his
perception of time than time itself, particularly when the background noises
regain their original loudness as time restores to normal.
This post is based upon the manifesto "Brainwashed, which you can read here.
The manifesto discusses seven "levers" which allow people to achieve success. I've summarized three of these below.
One of the levers Seth Godin mentions in “Brainwashed” is
what he calls “Acknowledging the Lizard”. According to Godin, the “lizard” is
the part of our brain which fears embarrassment and failure. This portion of
our mind, which he says has been present since pre-historic man, keeps us from
reaching our full creative potential by embarrassing into conformity. Another
of Godin’s levers is “connecting”, which is going out of your way to create an
actual personal connection to your consumers through the use of social media as
opposed to treating them as tally marks in your list of followers. It also
entails truly interacting with the consumer to create a more viable product and
a more personal brand. A third lever of Godin’s is “Being Generous” which goes
hand-in-hand with “connecting”, generously providing services and gifts to
build said connections and increase your personal brand’s worth.
The levers I’ve summarized above strike me, largely due to
their similarity to the manifesto delivered by one of my biggest professional
inspirations: Gary Vaynerchuk. Gary’s latest book, The Thank You Economy
is all about creating generous connections with consumers in order to receive
feedback, build brand loyalty, and become a more socially conscious content
producer. His previous book, Crush It, discussed “acknowledging the
lizard” extensively stating that with the right amount of stubbornness,
self-awareness, and capacity for embarrassment anyone can start a profitable business
based on their passion.
Reading various professionals opinions and methods in this
vein always inspires me as a student and as an artist. I think there’s a lot to
be said about those who have achieved personal success and are willing to offer
up their personal attitudes and strategies to those aspiring to be their
competition. Reading these kinds of manifestos and evaluating them helps me to
create my own attitudes toward success, creativity, and the “social web” environment
our field is creating. People like Godin and Vaynerchuk have rode in on the
first wave of this revolution, but they are more than willing to admit that the
tide is building and it will be my generation which ultimately rides the
biggest waves of this new phenomenon.
Keeping that in mind, I try to acquire as much advice as I
can from these “trailblazers” and “trendsetters” as I can, because I know that
I’ll shortly be launched into the same troubled waters they’re traversing. Its
inspiring to see their success, but it also motivates me to one-up them and do
it bigger and better than they ever dreamed. These stories are becoming
increasingly common, and each one is more inspiring than the others, but they
all share the same common threads Godin outlines in his manifesto. Seeing these
commonalities gives me a roadmap to follow in my pursuit of similar success in
my own projects.
In order to succeed in the Thank You Economy I need to: acknowledge
my own personal lizard, create art, build connections, be generous, crush it,
ship it, and keep those caring about those connections. This becomes
increasingly clear to me with every new social network launched, every online
retailer that goes public, and each YouTube superstar who records a successful
single or becomes a red carpet host at an award show.
In that regard, I think that these exercises are immensely
beneficial to me as a student, artist, and even as a person in this day and
age.
The following post is based upon the manifesto Finding Your Howl by Jonathon Flaum which can be downloaded and read free of charge from the link in the title.
One of the stories told in Jonathon
Flaum's “Finding Your Howl” is that of an assignment he received
in fifth grade wherein one of Flaum's classmates, Nick Thompson,
wrote a short story. Thompson's story told the unfortunate tale of a
caged tiger who plans his escape from captivity only to jump the cage
and land in another one. This jumping from cage to cage goes on
indefinitely until the end of the tiger's life presumably, which
becomes a metaphor for the endless struggle we undergo to escape our
self-made prisons and find our creative voice.
In finding my own howl, I often am
drawn to a line spoken by Owen Harper from the BBC series “Torchwood”
where he says of a complicated task he's attempting “Trust me, I'm
an improviser.” This quote, to me, summarizes the process of
finding one's own howl and also implementing it in an otherwise
uncreative life.
Over the course of my life I've found
that one of the hardest parts of creating anything is overcoming a
fear of my own inabilities and ignorance. I get so self-conscious
about the quality of work I can produce that I sometimes don't even
attempt to create anything, or if I do I create based on a tried and
true formula I've achieved success with previously. Learning to
ignore the twinge of embarrassment and “Trust me” and the work I
produce is something I constantly struggle with. I've also always had
a tendency to over-analyze. I think myself into a box and then only
allow myself to create within those confines.
While I'm confident of my
improvisational skills I don't utilizes them as often as I should.
“I'm an improviser”, but I take my improvised concepts and beat
them to death in my head before I actually create anything out of
them leaving the end result flat and uninteresting. Now don't get me
wrong, a perfectly calculated, meticulously crafted piece of art or
media is a wonderful sight to behold. However, there should also be a
certain amount of unfiltered inspiration and improvisation in a work
that places the artist's spirit into the work. Oftentimes I lose that
spark within the larger context of the work, or I ignore it in hopes
of pleasing a certain audience with the piece more than creating
something I'm truly proud of. Finding that perfect balance of
improvisation and craft is going to be one of the most difficult, but
ultimately the most rewarding, steps along the way to finding my own
creative voice.
As I get closer and closer to finding
my howl I realize that it's going to be difficult at times to shake
others with it as it has shaken me. Sharing ideas is one thing, but
moving people with them is entirely different. In order to create in
the way I hope to I'm going to have to get people to believe me when
I say “Trust me, I'm an improviser.” I'm going to need to prove
the strength of my idea as well as my flexibility and willingness to
come up with quick changes and solutions when an issue arises with my
original concepts. Part of this is going to come from building
relationships in the field and building up a reputations; however, a
majority of it is going to have to come from trusting in myself
enough to take an improvised idea and follow through with it as far
as possible.
When Owen says “Trust me, I'm an
improviser” both the viewers and the other characters immediately
get behind him. They've seen him work miracles in the past and they
know he's going to give his all trying every solution he can come up
with until the problem is solved. I can only hope that upon finding
my howl I am treated with the same trust, respect, and willingness
for collaboration.
In deconstructing characters I've chosen two iconic characters from the same film series. I won't reveal who the characters are until the end of the post for those interested in guessing.
Protagonist
For
the protagonist's color scheme I chose black, white and gold. They
portray the character's elegance as well as their viewpoint on the
world. This character tends to view things in a good/bad kind of way
often taking issue with characters who are ambivalent in nature.
Thus, the black and white contrast. Everything this character does
has an element of class and refinement to it. Even the most drastic
of actions taken by this character are done gracefully or with an air
of superior class and coolness. Their calm demeanor and smooth
handling of nearly every conceivable situation gives them a
mysterious cool that has been emulated for decades.
For the protagonist's lighting I chose a horizontal angle of light leaving a noticeably dark shadow over one side. The two aforementioned elements of the lighting both represent key features of this character. The horizontal angle of the light accentuates a sort of duality that the character has. This individual has two very distinctive sides, which can essentially be boiled down to the lover and fighter stereotype for protagonists. The two sides sometimes create inner conflict, but often coexist with slight blending as in the above photograph. The shadowing over one side of the statue's face in the image is also representative of this character's dark side which often appears when they are angry or in the heat of an intense sequence. The dark side of this individual is fairly relentless as evidenced by the lack of definition in the shadowed side of the statue in the photo's face.
The sharp, but sleek echelon shape of the above yacht is highly representative of this character's symbolic appeal. They have a few sharp edges, but are overall incredibly sleek and often referred to as such. The sharp edge accentuates the sexy sleek aspects and vice-versa, creating the perfect blend of hard and soft for which this character is known. While they lead with their sharp, confrontational edge most often they do quickly reveal their smooth, refined sides which become one of their most prominent features. The strength and military associations typically afforded to the echelon as a shape are accurate depictions of this character and his adventures.
Antagonist
For the antagonist's color scheme I chose the above combination of tans, oranges, and reds. Their nearly monochromatic, yet slightly complementary, combination show the mostly one-sided way in which this character is portrayed throughout the film series. The tan shows this character's practical nature and almost generic feel (which was later replicated and lampooned by many). The oranges and reds show the anger and, of course, evil which this character possesses. While this color scheme at first seems bold it slowly becomes uncomfortable and, to some extent, offensively bland with the occasional (almost out of place) element of blaring red as evidenced by this character's sometimes misplaced anger.
The above image showing the spotlighted chair is a very appropriate representation of this character's role within the story of the universe of fiction they inhabit. Initially shadowed ever so slightly in mystery, this character gradually gains prominence within the stories of this series just as the chair in the image gradually emerges into our vision out of the darkness of the background. Just like the lone spotlighted chair though, this character is placed in a class of their own during their time on-screen, but quickly fades away in the context of the series almost like a piece of furniture or a slight obstacle for our protagonist to quickly step over.
Much like this backwards chair our antagonist isn't completely revealed at first (both visually and conceptually). They are visibly supported by other smaller antagonists, which build suspense about their identity, but isn't fully revealed until long after their name is introduced. They have a very square, uncreative method of going about things. Their antagonistic actions aren't particularly original and usually take the least amount of originality possible to still be interesting and threatening. Their supporters, their air of mystery, and their one-sidedness are really their key traits as evidenced by this simplisticly designed backwards facing chair. The choice of subject in the last two images are pretty big hints as to the identity of this character.
Identities
For those playing along at home if you guessed that our protagonist was Agent 007, James Bond you would be absolutely correct. Mr. Bond's elegant brand of hard-edged violence against the universally "bad" villains and lackies in his twenty plus adventures has always greatly amused me so he seemed like a perfect character to deconstruct here. The antagonist, in case you couldn't guess from the number of chairs involved, was repeatedly underwhelming Bond nemesis Ernst Stavro Blofeld; the perpetually seated, cat-stroking, scar-faced leader of the international terrorist organization SPECTRE. Blofeld has always seemed like the most stereotypical of all the Bond villains and is certainly the most often mocked. His signature swiveling chair reveal is lampooned in many TV shows and movies and his character was so stereotypical he even served as the inspiration for Dr. Evil, the hillariously bland and dimwitted villain of the Austin Powers series.
