Week 8 assignment: essay – interrelationships reflection apa format | Applied Sciences homework help
- Examine a single scene in a recent film. Analyze the use of detail. In a carefully made film, the details will relate organically to the overall structure. How carefully made does the scene you have analyzed seem to be?
The conTexT of filM hiSTory All meanings, linguistic or nonlinguistic, exist within some kind of context. Most first-rate films exist in many contexts simultaneously, and it is our job as sensitive viewers to be able to decide which are the most important. Film, like every art, has a history, and this history is one of the more significant contexts in which every film takes place. To make that historical context fruitful in our filmic experiences, we must do more than just read about that history: We must accumulate a historical sense of film by seeing films that have been important in the development of the medium. Most of us have a rich personal backlog in film; we have seen a great many films, some of which are memorable and many of which have been influenced by landmark films. Furthermore, film exists in a context that is meaningful for the life work of a director and, in turn, for us. When we talk about the films of Orson Welles, Ingmar Bergman, or Federico Fellini, we are talking about the achievements of artists just as much as when we talk about the achievements of rembrandt, Vermeer, or van Gogh. Today we watch carefully for films by Steven Spielberg, Francis Ford Cop- pola, Woody Allen, Oliver Stone, Joel and Ethan Coen, pedro Almodóvar, Martin Scorsese, Alejandro Iñárritu, Spike Lee, Jane Campion, Quentin Tarantino, and Lina Wertmuller—to name only a few of the most active current directors—because their work has shown a steady development and because they, in relation to the his- tory of the film, possess a vision that is transforming the medium. In other words, these directors are altering the history of film in significant ways. In turn, we should be interested in knowing what they are doing because they are providing new con- texts for increasing our understanding of film. jac16871_ch12_299-329.indd 318 12/11/17 11:58 AM 319
CINEMA
Our concerns in this book have not been exclusively with one or another kind of context, although we have assumed that the internal context of a work of art is necessarily of first importance. But no work can be properly understood without resorting to external contextual examination. To understand the content of a work of art, we must understand something about the subject matter, and the subject matter is always embedded in some external context. Even such a simple act as a gesture may need explanation. For example, in Greece, to put the palm of your hand in the face of someone is considered insulting. If we do not know that and are watching a film involving Greece that includes the gesture, we may be completely misled. A visual image, a contemporary gesture, even a colloquial expression will sometimes show up in a film and need explication in order to be fully understood. Just as we sometimes have to look up a word in a dictionary—which exists outside a poem, for instance—we sometimes have to look outside a film for explanations. Even Terence Young’s James Bond thriller movies need such explication, although we rarely think about that. If we failed to understand the political assumptions un- derlying such films, we would not fully understand what was going on. Two greaT filMS: The GodfaTher anD CasablanCa Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather (Figure 12-13 ), produced in 1972, is based on Mario puzo’s novel about Vito Corleone, an Italian immigrant fleeing from Sicilian Mafia violence. he eventually became a don of a huge crime family in New York City. The film details the gradual involvement of Michael Corleone, played by Al pacino, FIGURE 12-13 The Godfather (1972). Marlon Brando plays Don Vito Corleone, the Godfather, conferring with a wedding guest asking for an important favor at the beginning of Francis Ford Coppola’s film. ©paramount/Kobal/rEX/Shutterstock jac16871_ch12_299-329.indd 319 12/11/17 11:58 AM 320 ChApTEr 12 in his father’s criminal activities during the years from 1945 to 1959. his father, Vito, played by Marlon Brando, suffers the loss of Sonny, an older son, and barely survives an assassination attempt. As Michael becomes more and more a central figure in his family’s “business,” he grows more frightening and more alienated from those around him until, as Godfather, it seems he becomes totally evil. Although some critics complained that the film glorified the Mafia, almost all have praised its technical mastery. A sequel, The Godfather: Part II, was produced in 1974 and, although not as tightly constructed as the first film, fleshes out the experience of Michael as he slowly develops into a mob boss. Both films center on the ambiguities involved in the conversion of the poverty-ridden Vito into a wealthy and successful gangster and Michael’s conversion from innocence to heart- less criminality. The Godfather films both engage our sympathy with Michael and increasingly horrify us with many of his actions. We admire Michael’s personal valor and his respect for father, family, and friends. But we also see the corruption and violence that are the bases of his power. Inevitably we have to work out for ourselves the ambiguities that Coppola sets out. The Narrative Structure of The Godfather Films The narrative structure of most films supplies the framework on which the film- maker builds the artistry of the shots and sound. An overemphasis on the artistry, however, can distract a viewer from the narrative, whereas a great film avoids al- lowing technique to dominate a story. Such is the case with The Godfather and The Godfather: Part II, we believe, because the artistry produces a cinematic lushness that helps tell the story. The first film begins with Michael Corleone, as a returning war hero in 1945, refusing to be part of his father’s criminal empire. The immediate family enjoys the spoils of criminal life—big cars, a large house in a guarded compound, family cele- brations, and lavish weddings. Although Michael’s brothers are active members of the crime family, they respect his wishes to remain apart. In a dispute over whether to add drug-running to the business of gambling, pros- titution, extortion, and labor racketeering, Vito is gunned down, but not killed. Michael comes to the aid of his father and so begins his career in the Mafia. It takes him only a short time to rise to the position of Godfather when Vito is too infirm to continue. When he marries Kay, played by Diane Keaton, Michael explains that the family will be totally legitimate in five years. She believes him, but the audience already knows better. It is no surprise that seven years later the family is more pow- erful and ruthless than ever. In a disturbing and deeply ironic sequence, Michael acts as godfather in the church baptism of his nephew at the same time his lieutenants are murdering the men who head the five rival crime families. Coppola jump-cuts back and forth from shots of Michael in the church promising to renounce the work of the devil to shots of his men turning the streets of New York into a bloodbath. This perversion of the sacrament of baptism illustrates the depths to which Michael has sunk. jac16871_ch12_299-329.indd 320 12/11/17 11:58 AM 321
CINEMA
In the second film, as the family grows in power, Michael moves to Tahoe, gain- ing control of casino gambling in Nevada. he corrupts a senator, who even while demanding kickbacks expresses contempt for Italians. When the senator is compro- mised by killing a prostitute, however, he cooperates fully with the Corleones. The point is made again and again that without such corrupt officials, the Mafia would be significantly less powerful. Michael survives an assassination attempt made possible by his brother Fre- do’s collusion with another gangster who is Michael’s nemesis. At first, Michael does nothing but refuse to talk to Fredo, but when their mother dies, he has Fredo murdered. Meanwhile, Kay has left him, and those who were close to him, except his stepbrother, Tom hagen (robert Duvall), have been driven away or murdered. The last images we have of Michael show him alone in his com- pound, staring into a darkened room. We see how far he has fallen since his early idealism. Coppola’s Images Coppola chooses his frames with great care, and many would make interesting still photographs. he balances his figures carefully, especially in the quieter scenes, sub- tly using asymmetry to accent movement. Sometimes he uses harsh lighting that radiates from the center of the shot, focusing attention and creating tension. he rarely cuts rapidly from one shot to another but depends on conventional estab- lishing shots—such as showing a car arriving at a church, a hospital, a home—before showing us shots of their interiors. This conventionality intensifies our sense of the period of the 1940s and 1950s, since most films of that period relied on just such techniques. Darkness dominates, and interiors often have a tunnel-like quality, suggesting passages to the underworld. rooms in which Michael and others conduct their busi- ness usually have only one source of light, and the resulting high contrast is disori- enting. Bright outdoor scenes are often marked by barren snow or winds driving fallen leaves. The seasons of fall and winter predominate, suggesting loneliness and death. Coppola’s Use of Sound The music in The Godfather helps Coppola evoke the mood of the time the film covers. Coppola used his own father, Carmine Coppola, as a composer of some of the music. There are some snatches of Italian hill music from small villages near Amalfi, but sentimental dance music from the big band period of the 1940s and 1950s predominates. An ingenious and effective use of sound occurs in the baptism/murder scene discussed earlier. Coppola keeps the sounds of the church scene—the priest recit- ing the Latin liturgy, the organ music, the baby crying—on the soundtrack even when he cuts to the murders being carried out. This accomplishes two import- ant functions: It reinforces the idea that these two scenes are actually occurring jac16871_ch12_299-329.indd 321 12/11/17 11:58 AM 322 ChApTEr 12 simultaneously, and it underscores the hypocrisy of Michael’s pious behavior in church. Because such techniques are used sparingly, their usage in this scene works with great power. The Power of The Godfather Those critics who felt the film glorified the Mafia seem not to have taken into ac- count the fated quality of Michael. he begins like Oedipus—running away from his fate. he does not want to join the Mafia, but when his father is almost killed, his instincts push him toward assuming the role of Godfather. The process of self- destruction consumes him as if it were completely out of his control. Moreover, despite their power and wealth, Michael and the Corleones seem to have a good time only at weddings, and even then the Godfather is doing business in the back room. Everyone in the family suffers. No one can come and go in freedom. Everyone lives in an armed camp. All the elements of the film reinforce that view. The houses are opulent, but vulnerable to machine guns. The cars are expensive, but they blow up. Surely such a life is not a glory. In shaping the film in a way that helps us see Mafia life as neither glamorous nor desirable, Coppola forces us to examine our popular culture—one that seems often to venerate criminals like Bonnie and Clyde, Jesse James, Billy the Kid, and John Dillinger. At the same time, Coppola’s refusal to treat his characters as simply loathsome, his acknowledgment that they are in some sense victims as well as victimizers, creates an ambiguity that makes his films an impressive achievement. PERCEPTION KEY The Godfather 1. Watch The Godfather on a large screen if possible. Examine the ways in which the pleasing quality of the visuals alters depending on what is being filmed. Are the violent moments treated with any less visual care than the lyrical moments? What happens on screen when the images are unbalanced or skewed enough to make you feel uncomfortable?