Second Film Meeting Recap: Atmosphere in Film

I suppose this is going to be a regular meeting addendum we are adding for those who missed the meetings or are just interested in re-reading what we discussed. You will all have to forgive me because I am writing this from memory several weeks after the fact (being waylaid by finals week and then vacation and whatnot). I believe we began the meeting by discussing what constituted “atmosphere” in films. Specifically, what technical components or emotional implications are utilized to express certain types of atmospheres? To make this easier to digest, I’m going to break it down according to the atmospheric senses we gathered from certain films.

Sexual Atmosphere: Eyes Wide Shut dir. Stanley Kubrick

The clip we viewed for this film was the orgy scene in which Tom Cruise crashes the privileged and private sex party orchestrated by a the elite one-percent (essentially) of Manhattan. In this scene, the sexual atmosphere sizzles palpably with tension and sensuality. The sensuality, however, is very Kubrickian, that is to say, the sensuality of these girls are perfect to a tee. Their bodies are all perfectly proportional, their features are remarkably similar, and with their masks on they are basically just perfect sex dolls. This impersonalization of these women’s identity really speaks to the overall sexual atmosphere of distance. These women’s sexuality is portrayed in a clinical sense that denotes a nuance of dehumanization. They are not people. Merely objects. Sex objects, to be more precise. Kubrick captures this estrangement from intimacy through the communal portrayal of sex. These are not acts of intimacy; these acts are carnal, base in every aspect of the idea of sex. Even the operatic music in the background underscores this ritualization of sex. The ominous chanting with piano accompaniment merely highlights this sense of sex as being a carnal ritual.

 

Horror/Suspense: Mulholland Drive dir. David Lynch

From Mulholland Drive we viewed the scene at Winky’s where a man tells his companion about his dream. The scene is denoted with a sense of surreal fear. There is a sense of disconnect from reality that is expressed through the free-floating camera technique Lynch utilizes. In addition to this camera technique is the low frequency of what seems to be miscellaneous industrial sounds. The sound is almost deafening, in a way. And as the man allows the feeling of fear to wash over him this sound hangs palpably in the air. The feeling of suspense is characterized by this sound, or seemingly absence of any detectable kind of sound. As the two companions leave the Winky’s to go in search of the shadowy figure from the man’s dream, their journey to the back of Winky’s is in almost complete silence. There are moments in which the sound slips in and out like a radio losing its frequency. The audience waits with bated breath for this shadowy figure to emerge, but Lynch waits. And this waiting game is what strikes the cord of true horror in the hearts of the viewers (as well as the man). When the shadowy figure finally appears, it is so brief, so quick that the sound that accompanies this appearance rushes forth. The man is not only attacked by the sensation of fear, but also pushed back by this rush of sound. Lynch’s utilization of sound seems to be the crucial component in capturing a sense of atmosphere in Mulholland Drive as exhibited by this scene.

Melancholy/Existential: American Beauty dir. Sam Mendes

For this directorial debut from Sam Mendes we examined the scene between Jane and Ricky. The scene has a sense of intimacy due to the lack of back lighting in the scene. As the two teenagers watch the video Ricky filmed of a plastic bag swaying in the wind, the sense of melancholy and infinite insignificance permeates the frame. Yet there is a sense of hopefulness in the kiss the two shares with each other at the end; the sense that there is beauty in this fucked up world. I mean when we get down to it, here are two kids whose home lives are not exactly the peaches and cream. In addition to their messed up familial issues, their social awkwardness is also almost crippling. This only culminates into the ultimate feeling of alienation. Thus, for these two to find each other and to share this intimate moment connotes a beauty that is possible; a beauty that can emerge from the mundane. As the plastic bag also exemplifies, everyday objects, that are taken for granted and so prevalent it is invisible, those objects contain beauty too. Another interesting point raised was by Michael Figlock from Filmmakers’ Ambition who commented on the presence of the plastic bag as being indicative of an industrial presence. While I disagree with this interpretation of the figuration of the plastic bag, I still find it interesting to contrast this invisible sense of industrialism with the pristine image of the suburb. Whatever this bag might truly represent, all I can truly say is that American Beauty is a powerfully tragic and beautiful movie.

First Meeting Recap: Is film becoming too fast?

So, I figured it might be cool if after every meeting I wrote a sort of mini-recap about what we went over--what went down, more or less, in the wicked hour we spent together. I doubt anyone will really care to read it, but that won't stop me from writing it! :)

This will, then, be a summary of our first ever meeting (however uneven it may have been), where we asked ourselves if film is becoming "too fast" and assessed the notion of "chaos cinema."

We started off by watching a video essay that proposed the notion of an increasingly sloppy, fast cutting, even incomprehensible style that has more or less afflicted modern Hollywood (and in particular modern Hollywood action films). As the essay essentially argued, in somewhat alarmist terminology, the trend toward the "chaos" technique is a detrimental deconstruction of the even, spacial continuity of an older and better Hollywood. 

So what we examined then, in response to the essay's notice of stylistic "degradation," was whether contemporary action film has indeed devolved into chaos, or if there is worth to be found in that chaotic style. That is, we asked ourselves, does chaos cinema have some value, or is an older classical style simply superior by intrinsic value?

The pretty much unanimous answer was, unsurprisingly, yes and no. 

Yes, we agreed, some modern films do employ the style to a negative effect. Most notably, as was pointed out, filmmakers like Tony Scott and Michael Bay indulge excessively in the "amplified intensity" of fast cutting, blurring, explosions, camera movement, and etc. They were our prototypical examples of chaotic excess--stylists who go overboard, and assault their audiences with an overload of sensory information too fast to perceive. Filmmakers who engage with the chaos style constantly, we decided generally, were noted to have a depreciating sense of effectiveness as things wore on in whatever of their films—the chaos gets tiring, and as a narrative progresses it grows exhaustive and waters down any moments that may have had particular poignancy. The predominant emotion is simply intensification and vague unfocused excitement—there is little room left for anything else.

And then, no, we agreed, chaos cinema, or intensified continuity, is not something to dismiss outright. There are moments we noted where film can employ speed effectively. The quickness, perhaps in fleeting fight scenes (as one example), can be used as an effective tool for anxiety, intensity, and so forth. The Bourne series, in particular, was noted as an effective example where, despite fast cutting, the speed was used to an effective end. Danny Boyle was also mentioned as a stylist who sometimes employs a chaotic editing style but does so in a meaningful way (though I personally am no great fan of his take on chaos).

Thus, the ultimate conclusion was ambiguous. Whether chaos cinema is a timely reflection of an ADD generation or a terrible destruction of “real” cinema was deemed a thing to be assessed for each particular film. It is not a blanket term that should be applied over a whole genre—just over Michael Bay films :)


Here is the link to the video essay if anyone wants to watch it: http://vimeo.com/28016047

First Film Club Meeting

Hey everyone, just wanted to let you all know the first ever film club meeting is Thursday, October 27th at 6 pm. Come check it out, we'll be discussing "chaos cinema." What is it, what does it mean for viewers, and what effect might it have on modern cinema.

Here is the poster for more details:

Starting out the Film Club

Hey everyone,

So it's finally official. We jammed the paperwork through and are a properly registered student club!

Now, as a brand new club, we are obviously faced with myriad difficulties, chief of which finding members and, in turn, establishing a consistent and meaningful approach to our beloved subject.

I say this here, on the public forum, because I have no desire for the officers to cloister themselves off and design the club in ways they (we) specifically see fit. Our intention is to design a club that will serve all our purposes. Now this may, of course, sound slightly idealistic, but I believe this club can come to serve a very broad function that will benefit most, if not all its participants in some small or big way. Whether that be via contacts (for future short film production or otherwise), understanding of film technique and theory, or just the general establishment of friendship, I think we can make it mean something.

One thing I think we all want to avoid is making film club "filler hour." That is, we don't want to show up begrudgingly and stutter our way through a depressingly long hour. Fortunately, we are lucky to have an area of focus that is both a loved and hugely integral part of everyday life--and it's visual, and therefore easier to communicate. Still, the dispassionate filler hour curse is a pitfall I know many clubs fall into, and one we want to avoid.

That will come down to, in large part, how passionately we approach this club of ours. If we treat it as such, so it will become.

Now, as to what each meeting will be about, that is not set in stone. So far the officers and myself have decided that we wish to find a balance between both a production side of film, and a general (I hesitate to say theoretical) appreciation of film. That can mean anything really. But in this case, we planned on holding themed topics per each meeting. Perhaps one day we might discuss the effects of 3D on contemporary cinema, while on another we talk of how bad ass Blade Runner is, and on the next hold a screenwriter workshop or show people how to rent equipment to make their own films or whatever. Honestly, the possibilities are many, and will be up to, in large part, what we the club decide on.

As we take the club further, the officers and I have spoken of more ambitious things. Stuff like mini-student films festivals, screenings, maybe club trips to festivals? Who knows. There is a ton of cool stuff to pursue, even if that means just going to indie flicks together in Sac.

That's all for now. In the meantime I'll look forward to the first meeting and making this club into something substantial.

I'll be announcing an official meeting time and topic soon (if we decide it won't just be a pure introductory meeting).

Until then,
James O'Hara
President of UCD Film Club
jpohara@ucdavis.edu