Question 2
Week 5; Comments on Cinematography

The first point that interested me about this particular reading is the way Martin Scorsese is so passionate about the fine things. He finds greater interest in what is “special” about a shot and if there is no special he loses interest. I think this is interesting because it’s true. It’s not something that as an average viewer you think to take notice of, but as a director you want your shots to be special every time and you want your audience to not have to consciously realise that there’s nothing special about a particular scene. With this, as Scorsese mentions, it becomes more of a simplistic idea turned complex. To be able to insert something special into every shot is something that takes great skill and precision. It’s the idea that something average, such as a hand or finger, was left out or put in just to add that bit of meaning, a sense of direction within the shot.

Secondly I found it interesting when Makavejev discusses the idea of framed reality; whatever is in the frame is all that exists and anything that exists beyond that is something created by what’s in the frame. This is very true to the audience and something that the creators can easily overlook, as they are the ones with the larger picture in their head. It is important to remember that the audience doesn’t have to storyline constantly in their mind when they’re viewing the film and to remember that what’s in the frame is all that exists helps the cinematographer and director remember that signifiers and alluding to are very important elements to remain and include within shots so the audience is captured in the world of the film.