This week we were given a script and were to interpret, plan and produce this in our Friday’s class. Our group picked the main roles out of a hat. I was picked to direct the scene. During our initial planning I thought it would be more beneficial if we went down to the edit suites and analysed the location. Angus and I worked together mapping out particular shots that would allow us to get effective coverage. Incase we missed anything, I wanted each shot to continue throughout most of the drama/dialogue. As time was our biggest constraint I didn’t think that continuing through the drama would have an impact on it. I assumed that as we were already set up, we could just fly through all the actions.

The second task we were given was to change roles and produce the script without the intention of cutting back to any previous shots. This constraint sounds quite difficult, although, I was surprised to learn that this shoot was ran more fluently than the one I directed. This may have been because as a crew we had adapted to our roles and environment. Only shooting what was necessary and not considering cutting back and forth between shots made a huge difference in efficiency compared with the first shoot. I would be interested to see whether if we had shot the second shoot first and the one I directed second, would mine run more fluently considering everyone was familiar with the script and environment? It will be interesting to compare the final edits of both shoots to see whether there were an gaps in the coverage.

This week I analysed a scene in the film, ‘Inglourious Basterds’. I was intrigued by the dialogue within this scene. It was quite witty and clever, the way that it referred to relevant, crude analogies. There was a history context to this scene but other than that it could fall on its own and still have an impact on its audience. The mise-en-scene captured my attention along with the cinematography style. It gave me some inspiration that I am going to use to brainstorm some ideas for my final scene.

Scene Deconstruction – ‘Inglourious Basterds’                                    Duration: 00:04:27 – 00:20:23

Shot Breakdown:

1. Long shot Hans & Farmer from behind two daughters

2. Long shot three daughters

3. (Return) Long shot Hans & Farmer – Tracks to mid shot of Hans

4. Close up daughter

5. (Return) Mid shot Hans

6. Close up daughter

7. (Return) Mid shot Hans – walks back to reveal long shot [balanced composition]

8. Long shot girls & Hans

9. Mid shot Farmer

10. Mid shot Hans & daughters

11. Mid shot Farmer

12. Long shot daughter walking to window

13. Mid shot Farmer & daughter

14. Mid shot daughter closing window

15. Mid shot Hans at table

16. Close up daughter [Important eye line]

17. Mid shot Farmer

18. Lower angle mid shot Hans at table

19. Mid shot Farmer

20. (Return)Lower angle mid shot Hans at table

21. (Return) Mid shot Farmer

22. Mid three shot, Farmer sits down at table – Pan & Tilt – Mid two shot

23. Close up daughter

24. (Return) Mid two shot

25. Long shot daughters leave

26. Low angle long two shot – table Hans & Farmer

27. Mid shot Farmer – Behind Hans

28. Mid shot Hans – Behind Farmer

29. (Return) Mid shot Farmer – Behind Hans

30. (Return) Mid shot Hans – Behind Farmer

31. Mid shot Farmer [Tighter]

32. (Return) Mid shot Hans – Behind Farmer

33. Mid shot Farmer

34. (Return) Mid shot Hans – Behind Farmer

35. Mid shot Farmer

36. (Return) Mid shot Hans – Behind Farmer

37. Mid shot Farmer

38. (Return) Mid shot Hans – Behind Farmer

39. Mid shot Farmer

40. Mid shot Hans – NEARLY POV Farmer [revealing window]

41. Mid shot Farmer

42. Mid shot Hans – Behind Farmer

43. Mid shot Farmer – Behind Hans

44. (Return) Mid shot Hans – Behind Farmer

45. (Return) Mid shot Farmer – Behind Hans

46. Mid shot Farmer [Tighter] 

47. Close up Farmer – tilt, pan & focus change to pipe

48. Mid two shot Farmer & Hans – Tracks behind [almost 180 degrees]

49. Extreme close up writing

50. Close up Farmer – Side angle – Tracks down through floor revealing hidden Jewish people

51. Close up eyes through floor – Tracks up

52. Long shot Farmer & Hans

53. Low angle two shot Farmer & Hans

54. Mid shot Hans

55. Mid shot Farmer

56. (Return) Mid shot Hans

57. Mid shot hidden Jewish people

58. Mid shot Farmer

59. (Return) Mid shot Hans

60. (Return) Mid shot Farmer

61. (Return) Mid shot Hans

62. (Return) Mid shot Farmer

63. (Return) Mid shot Hans

64. (Return) Mid shot Farmer

65. Low angle two shot

66. (Return) Mid shot Hans – Pan [Camera follows his movement]

67. (Return) Mid shot Farmer

68. (Return) Mid shot Hans

69. (Return) Mid shot Farmer

70. Low angle two shot

71. Mid two shot Farmer & Hans [Change angle]

72. Close up Hans – Track forward

73. Close up Farmer – Track forward

74. (Return) Close up Hans – Track forward

75. (Return) Close up Farmer – Track forward

76. (Return) Close up Hans – Track forward

77. (Return) Close up Farmer – Track forward

78. (Return) Close up Hans – Track forward

79. (Return) Close up Farmer – Track Forward

80. Long two shot [Change angle]

81. Mid shot Farmer & table

82. Long shot Hans – Behind Farmer [Camera follows his movements]

83. Close up Feet walking

84. Mid shot German’s

85. Mid shot Farmer & table

86. Long shot German’s – Behind Farmer

87. Mid – Close shot Hans

88. High angle, looking down to ground

89. Mid shot Farmer

90. Mid shot feet German’s firing

91. (Return) High angle, looking down to ground

92. (Return) Mid shot Farmer

93. (Return) High angle, looking down to ground

94. Mid shot Hans

95. High angle, looking down to ground through roof [Parallels rat analogy]

96. Low angle, mid – close Hans looking down

97. Close up floor as Jewish people flee

98. (Return) Low angle, mid-close up Hans

 

Analysis:

The 2009 film, ‘Inglourious Basterds’, Directed by ‘Quentin Tarantino’, is a graphic representation of the various rebels who attempt to assassinate Adolf Hitler during World War II. The narrative follows multiple story lines as they converge. The opening sequence plays a significant role in revealing two major characters within the film, as well as desensitizing the audience to the abrupt violence. This presentation of violence is prevalent not only throughout ‘Inglourious Basterds’, but also within other ‘Tarantino’ films such as ‘Django Unchained’ and ‘Kill Bill’.

The opening scene evolves around a Nazi Colonel ‘Hans Landa’ who is making a visit to a German family of farmers who are suspected of hiding Jewish people within their home. The scene, from the time the Colonel enters the house, to the final shot of the girl escaping, runs for over 15 minutes. It is a significantly long scene and the camera coverage aids in maintaining the audiences attention and in driving the narrative forward. Space, movement and timing within each composition are manipulated effectively, contributing successfully to the overall reception of the scene and throughout the film. Significant colour pallets and lighting set ups can be recognized not only within this film, but within the workings of Cinematographer ‘Robert Richardson’ in films such as ‘Django Unchained’ and ‘Shutter Island’.

The use of space and timing of the performance is imperative to how the scene progresses. The dialogue is extensive and significant. It takes the audience on a journey as it unravels the connections with the location, the importance of Hans’ visit and the direction the scene is going. Tension plays a huge role in audience reception. The audience doesn’t want Hans to find the Jewish people, however his wit and prior experience as the ‘Jewish Hunter’ forbids this.

Together ‘Tarantino’ and ‘Richardson’ have constructed each shot in order to reveal something significant. This is expressed through their use of composition. For example, the shot displayed below on the left has been broken up into sections. Each of the four characters fall in a fifth of the frame. The window is represented as the most significant. Within the window is Hans’ soldiers. It is revealing to the audience that they are ‘guarding’ the house, which also gives them a sense of isolation, aiding to the rising tension and conflict throughout the scene. Later in the scene a second window is revealed, as the shots change from a conversation reverse shot, to Hans’ from a different angle. The change almost seems unnecessary until a second window reveals to the audience that there are no guards outside this side of the house. This foreshadows the girl’s escape at the end of the scene when she runs in this direction.

‘Richardson’ has used predominantly wide and mid shots similar to the above images. The composition within every shot has been strategically constructed. The negative space becomes the space that the ‘Farmer’ walks into to retrieve his pipe, or where Hans brings out his folder onto the table [refer above] The characters use all the space that is provided to them and the composition has been adapted to this. This style of filming is quite mechanical and contrived. If the actors and the director were not as competent, the scene may have dragged and felt boring to the audience. ‘Christoph Waltz’ performs his lines of dialogue with conviction that immerses the audience into the drama of the narrative.

Camera movement is used very few times within the scene. The camera pans and tilts to follow the characters movements, although is only tracks around the room when it is about to hit a beat in the scene. There are two or three beats within the scene that are recognized through a change in tone, the arrival of non-diegetic sound and these camera movements. For example the camera tracks around the back of the two characters and then from this position moves under the floor boards to reveal the Jewish people hiding. The slow pace in which the camera moves increases the tension within the scene and is emphasized through the lack of non-diegetic sound up until the final climax of the scene.

Lighting plays a significant role within the opening scene of ‘Inglourious Basterds’. It is quite high key, giving depth to the characters in order to separate them from the background. All light sources are identified. The windows provide the most light source together with a small lamp that subtly supplies a back light. A fill light has been used for the characters faces. The lighting is quite warm, which could be the result of reflection from the oak and wooden colours or the implementation of filters to create this effect. The table at times appeared to be over exposed, perhaps to highlight the importance of Hans’ folder which was the key to the fate of the family.

‘Richardson’ along with the production design crew have crafted a very neutral colour pallet. Through the use of grey tones, oak, wood and quite warm hues, the aesthetically pleasing compositions do not detract from the focus of the scene. The negative space within the frames, unless the characters interact within that space, is quite dark and subtle. ‘Richardson’ or ‘Tarantino’ have chosen to omit any distinct colour, besides one object, Hans’ pipe. This may be to contrast the wooden, less attractive pipe that the ‘Farmer’ uses. A similar motif of colour can be identified in the 2010 Martin Scorsese film ‘Shutter Island’ where ‘Teddy Daniels’ bright coloured tie contrasts the very neutral colour pallet. ‘Richardson’ was Cinematographer for this film as well and represents a good comparison of craft.

‘Richardson’ has used a similar style of composition depicted within ‘Inglourious Basterds’ and ‘Shutter Island’. The opening scene of ‘Shutter Island’ represents a similar theme of being guarded, isolated and threatened by an authoritative figure. Referring to the frames depicted below, ‘Richardson’ has created a symmetrical composition that emphasizes the authority through a ‘triangle’ shape representing hierarchy. This technique causes the audience to feel restricted and confined.

A reoccurring technique used by ‘Richardson’ is his ability to create a very eerie, surreal depiction of terror. He projects light into smoke in order to capture the detail of debris that is flying everywhere. This is usually used when illustrating a catastrophic event in time. It heightens the emotion causing the audience to feel uneasy. Seen below are two examples of this. On the left is a shot from ‘Inglourious Basterds’ in the opening scene. On the right is a shot from ‘Shutter Island’ where snow is flying around as ‘Teddy’ walks through a grave yard from a concentration camp during the holocaust (a memory/dream). This technique can also be identified in ‘Richardson’s’ work on ‘Django Unchained’.

The opening scene within ‘Inglourious Basterds’ encompasses conventional elements that reinforce the narrative. The use of camera coverage, lighting, colour, space and timing, contributes to the overall reception of the film, driving the narrative forward. Cinematographer ‘Robert Richardson’ and Director ‘Quentin Tarantino’ work together effectively, crafting a long, extensive scene in order to set the tone, pace and abrupt violence for the entire film. ‘Richardson’s’ cinematography techniques for ‘Inglourious Basterds’, such as his use of high key lighting and neutral colour pallets, can be identified in some of his other work such as ‘Shutter Island’ and ‘Django Unchained’. His mechanical approach compliments the story, the actors and the Director’s work.

 

This week we focused on the Directing side of film production. We were in charge of allocating roles amongst our group. I wanted to experiment with a shot that I have seen in the film ‘The Judge’. The shot in the film was filmed wider, with an emphasis on the mis-en-scene. As we were filming in RMIT I wanted to tighten the shot but still use the same principle.

I set up an actor in the back ground and then an actor in the foreground. The background character says their first line and then we change focus to the foreground character for their response. The background character says their second line and then they exit the frame (out of focus). The idea was capturing dialogue and a response in the same frame without having to cut to a different shot. There were a few issues with attempting this technique – We had to spread the actors out far away from the camera and each other in order to achieve a narrow depth of field. Initially the camera was too close causing a wide depth of field. I determined that creating a greater distance between the camera and the actors, would allow for a narrower depth of field. It took a bit of adjusting but Angus did a great job at pulling off this shot.

I enjoyed this exercise as it allowed me to have the reigns with how I want to shoot the sequence/shot. Usually, I tend fall back and reaffirm ideas and techniques with the group. Assigning everyone distinct roles also gave momentum to the task as they focused only on what their job was. This was more efficient and we covered way more shots (that were far more complicated) than we did shooting the sequence last week.

Epiphany: 

I have a better understanding of what the course is highlighting. I thought that we were focusing on individual scenes without the context of a larger film. I am now aware that each scene we study doesn’t have to fall on its own; it can be apart of something bigger. It seems quite obvious now that I think of it – ‘A SCENE in CINEMA’. I now feel as though I have more breadth when it comes to my final scene that I produce for my final assessment.

Leave the audience wondering, searching for greater meaning!

I am looking forward to feedback on the directing task as well as working with our group again. They are a talented bunch!

Until next time… Sarah.

Scene Deconstruction:

 

‘The Judge’ – Director ‘David Dobkin’

Duration: 1:28:41 – 1:31:17

Shot List:

Shot_01: Long Shot Hank – Front view, backwards tracking

Shot_02: Long Shot Hank

Shot_03: Mid Shot Hank

Shot_04: Long Shot Judge from behind Hank

Shot_05: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_06: Mid Shot Judge

Shot_07: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_08: Mid Shot Judge

Shot_09: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_10: Mid Close Up Judge

Shot_11: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_12: Mid Shot Judge

Shot_13: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_14: Mid Close Up Judge

Shot_15: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_16: Mid Close Up Judge

Shot_17: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_18: Mid Close Up Judge

Shot_19: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_20: Mid Close Up Judge

Shot_21: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_22: Mid Close Up Judge

Shot_23: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_24: Mid Close Up Judge

Shot_25: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_26: Mid Close Up Judge

Shot_27: Mid Close Up Hank

Shot_28: Mid Shot Judge from Behind Hank

Shot_29: Mid Shot Hank – Front view

Shot_30: Mid Shot Judge – Close Up Hank

Shot_31: Mid Shot Hank – Front view

Shot_32: Mid Shot Judge – Close Up Hank

Shot_33: Mid Shot Hank

Shot_34: Mid Shot Brother

Shot_35: Mid Shot Hank

Shot_36: Mid Shot Brother – Hank exits

Analysis:

The 2014 film, ‘The Judge’, Directed by David Dobkin, is a dramatic story that represents the dynamics of a dysfunctional family with re-emerging unresolved issues. The premise of the film is based around a successful lawyer, Hank Palmer, who returns to his hometown for his mother’s funeral, only to be faced with the resurfacing conflicts from his past. His father, ‘Judge’ Palmer, is suspected of murder when convincing evidence ties him to the crime. Hank aids his father representing him as his lawyer. Within close proximity of one another, the two characters begin to spill out their suppressed resentment for each other. A raging cyclone tares through the town forcing everyone into bunkers for protection. Hank and the Judge are at breaking point. Eager for seclusion, the Judge retreats to the house through the storm. Hank follows after him and they both confront their underlying conflicts, erupting in a verbal argument. This particular scene is the resonance of the film. It is the turning point for both of the characters as they attempt to resolve their ongoing dispute. Mise-en-scene, lighting, sound and camera coverage has been effectively constructed in order to aid the progression of the narrative and leave a lasting impact on the audience.

The filmmakers constructed this sequence very effectively. They split the fight into two segments. This may have allowed them to shoot them separately in order to raise the emotion of the actors slowly and to give them time to build their performance.

The entire sequence was shot ‘hand held’ or at least with a rig. The two opening shots set’s the scene for the argument. Hank walks through the front doors. The only lighting that we see is coming from the windows. The curtains wave vigorously in the wind appealing to not only the external chaos that is arising but also paralleling Hanks inner chaos.

Hank moves at a fast pace towards the camera. This makes the audience feel his urgency to confront his father. The camera tracks backwards. The second shot is a long shot of Hank from side on as Hank storms into the kitchen. The shot follows Hank and finishes in the kitchen with a mid shot of the Judge from behind Hank. The showdown begins.

The mise-en-scene of the kitchen tells us a lot about the characters. It is evident that this is the Judge’s kitchen as everything is quite old and dated. For example, the wallpaper on the wall and the fact that there is only one chair at the table suggest that there is a connection with the past. This makes the audience feel as though there is a lot of history within the home. The house is lit with two windows that pour in light creating harsh shadows. It is not a traditional soft-lit room; it is dark and over exposed at times. Hank moves towards the sink and is exposed to the harsh sunlight coming from the window. There may be underlying symbolic reason behind this, although, it may be assumed that this was a result of the organic method involved in producing this scene.

The back and forth argument begins. A simple two shot of mid close ups, follow the argument. These are hand held using a rig, with quite a wide depth of field. The camera’s follows each character as they move within the space. The wider depth of field indicates that perhaps the camera operators were preparing themselves to be manoeuvring around the kitchen.

A wider mid shot of the Judge from behind Hank is the key to pushing the scene forward and allowing the Judge to exit. Hank turns and retreats to the doorway towards the camera, resting his head on the wall. The framing is close. From here the camera changes focus to the Judge’s dialogue and then back to Hank’s reaction as he turns and faces away from the Judge. When Hank fires back the shot cuts to a mid shot of Hank from the front view. This is a very effective way of representing three different components; The Judge’s arguments, Hanks reaction as the Judge is speaking and Hank’s rebuttal. Hank changes direction from confronting his father and then turning away and allowing the audience to see his reaction. Hank is showing the audience his pain that he has been reluctant to reveal up until this point. The audience is able to empathise with Hank, to see him at his most vulnerable as he tries to hide it from his father. The scene closes with his father leaving and his brother appearing in the doorway, having watched the argument. This reveals the power his father has within the household. It is a reflection of what most likely happened when they were younger; Hank argued with his father and his brother watched quietly in the corner. The filmmakers chose not to reveal his brother until the end of the scene, as it would have added a third dynamic to the argument. The argument was about Hank and the Judge.

The overall coverage of this scene was effective in playing its role and delivering the appropriate content. The camera captured the performance of an erupting argument, immersing the audience into the drama of the film. The coverage was organic. It threw the audience into the chaos using the hand held style to follow the characters. From a filmmaking point of view, the coverage gave breadth to the construction of the shots. It gave space to the actors, allowing them to move around and evoke a more emotive performance. This is different to traditional blocking methodology when covering a scene. Blocking can sometimes produce a mechanical performance. This method of construction lends itself to improvisation, experimentation and creativity of not only the actor’s performance, but also the camera angles and shot types. The coverage aids the reception of the scene in context with the entire film.

The long weekend came and went quickly. I feel as though I have barely blinked and it is the second week. We completed another experimental project in class. This task helped me to identify the process of shooting a scene/sequence. Working in a group was great to be able to feed off everyone’s ideas. As no one in particular had ‘ownership’ over the project there were no identifiable roles, therefore everyone was hesitant to express their opinion too much. This week dived further into the technical side of coverage, which is an area that I thoroughly enjoy. We studied a sequence of shots and HOW we would go about filming them. This feels more relevant to where I want to be in the future (Director).

Upon approaching the scene deconstruction task I instantly began to file through movies that I had a deep understanding of. This seemed like the ‘easy’ option. I didn’t realize I was doing it until I couldn’t come up with a film that I was really passionate about analyzing.

Over the long weekend I watched a film called ‘The Judge’. Although, I was distracted for most part of the film, when I turned my attention to it, it seemed very well made. There were a few scenes that were shot interestingly, changing focus, characters walking in different directions. It was quite poetic. A turning point in the film exploded with this incredible scene; a verbal confrontation between the Judge and his son. EPIPHANY!

This one particular scene reinforced my connection with film as a Director, Writer, Director of Photography.

This was the scene that I analyzed for my deconstruction. I had to watch it at least 10 times so that I could focus on the way that it was shot and not the conflict between these two characters. I was so immersed in it that I was forced to press stop at every shot change in order to be able to analyze it from a technical perspective. This scene was covered in a way that allowed the actors the space to perform. The camera followed them and conformed to their movements. It was a very organic performance. I want to create film that evokes this type of response.

Week one is finally over! There is always a build up of anticipation when returning to University; who am I going to meet? What am I going to learn over the next 12 weeks? The only expectations that I had for ‘The Scene in Cinema’ were that we would be analyzing scenes within cinema. It was beneficial familiarizing myself with cameras and equipment again. This is a part of my brain, which has been switched off over the summer period.

I chose this course, as I am always eager to extend my knowledge in all areas of cinema. I like to open up to new ways of thinking and to new perspectives. After our lecture, I am confident that I am going to gain a lot more knowledge involving camera coverage within scenes. I was a little concerned at the beginning of Friday’s session, as it has always been embedded into me that story, plot and pre production is key to a successful sequence. I couldn’t comprehend that we would be dismissing those elements in order to experiment with new ways of covering scenes. I had an epiphany!

‘Instead of being stuck with my learned behaviour, I am going to challenge myself to focus on advanced technical ways of capturing footage.’

This area of filmmaking has always been done FOR me. Someone else is always the ‘guru’ and as a group we turn to them for guidance. I am challenging myself this semester to learn more in depth knowledge on capturing aesthetically beautiful shots. Not only learn – I am going to capture a moving sequence that is aesthetically beautiful and appeals as a professional standard.

Welcome to your brand new blog at Media Factory .

To get started, simply log in, edit or delete this post and check out all the other options available to you.

For assistance, visit the edublogs User Guide. (Or come to class.)