The Language Of Film
Anyone
can write about what they see on a TV or movie screen. The media studies
student who is after good grades in their essays will, however, be using
the correct terminology to pinpoint EXACTLY what the film-makers are
trying to do, and addressing the big issues of film theory such as how
this medium engage with the representation of reality. Film is a language
all its own, a way of communicating using images which is understood
around the globe, perhaps even around the galaxy - how else would we
try to communicate with aliens, except by using pictures? However, like
any other language it has rules and conventions which can be deconstructed,
and, through deconstruction, understood. But in order to deconstruct,
you have to be able to give all the pieces a name.
What we
see on the screen is the diegesis
(the narrative world of the film) and it can be divided up into two
areas:
| Mise-en-scène
|
The
things in the scene - these are literally the things put in
the picture for you to look at. All or some may be significant,
but nothing is accidental - remember, this is not reality, it
is a re-presentation of it. This will include actors (think
about the use of stars), set (think about the input of the designer,
especially the use of colour), costume, lighting. You should
consider how the mise-en-scène reflect the production
values of the movie. Location is an important aspect of mise-en-scène:
why was that particular place chosen, and what advantages/restrictions
would you associate with filming there?
|
| Mise-en-shot
|
The
process of translating mise-en-scène into
moving pictures, into shots, and the relationship between the
two. The main parameters are
- camera
position
- camera
movement
- shot
scale (LS/MS/CU etc)
- duration
of the single shot
- the
pace of editing
- depth
of focus
|
When describing
movement, we consider primary action,
ie the movement of characters/objects within the frame and secondary
action, ie the movement of the camera in relation to those
objects.
Editing
There is
an old adage that films are edited, not made. Much important work is
done in the edit suite. While a good editor may not always be able to
salvage a bad film, a bad editor can certainly ruin what might otherwise
have been a good one. There are two main sorts of editing:
- continuity
- continuous action shown in sequence
- montage
- a series of seemingly unrelated shots that the audience must work
to connect.
Hollywood
movies tend to go for continuity editing, a style also known as transparency
(ie you don't notice it). Actions flow smoothly from one frame to another,
and the audience simply follow the dialogue. Oppositional to this, and
the style employed by many art-house films is framed
editing, where the audience are continually reminded that they are viewing
an artificially created text. Jump cuts, sudden stoppages of sound,
juxtapositional shots etc are used to intrude upon the diegetic world.
When shots
are placed next to each other in a sequence the link between them is
known as a transition. The simplest of these is a cut, ie a straight
splice from one section of film to another. There are many others -
fades, dissolves, wipes, plus those
offered by sophisticated digital software.
Read more
about editing @
Imperica.com
Sound
When analysing
film you also need to consider SOUND. It is a vital part of the information
used for decoding film - whether it comes in the form of a lush string
soundtrack or footsteps echoing O/S down a corridor.
- This
may be diegetic
(coming from inside the narrative world of the film eg characters'
voices) or non-diegetic
(coming from another source - eg a voice-over or pumping music soundtrack).
- It can
be further divided into dialogue (human
voices), synchronous (matching actions
seen on the images) or asynchronous (from
unseen sources) sound effects, and music.
Read an
excellent Introduction
to Film Sound here, plus look at the range of articles and discussions
@ FilmSound
Further
Reading
This is
just a very basic introduction. For more on film theory, try: