Hi there and Happy Valentine's Day! As you might have expected, today was time for us to take a more in-depth look into our genre, science-fiction thriller. Being that this genre is so vast and nuanced, my teammates and I have decided to thoroughly examine three films from the grouping of our choice, in order to ensure we would not be overwhelmed by the thousands of movies out there. With that being said, our first film of choice was director Ang Lee's 2019 film, "Gemini Man," starring the well-known Will Smith.
To break down this film and see how it applies to the aforementioned genre, we'll need to analyze its use of various aspects which I have outlined below:
Camera Angles, Movement, and Shots:
To begin with, all of the camera shots, angles, and movements used within the film did fall in line with the typical conventions of any given science-fiction thriller. During the film, the location changed multiple times; therefore, in an effort to make things as clear as possible for the audience, the director chose to incorporate establishing long shots which showed areas, such as a field, train station, and a city. These shots were often accompanied by some sort of panning motion that would eventually settle on a wide view of the landscape, alongside on-screen, embedded textual supplements, that were added in during the movie's editing stages, that would give the audience information regarding the name of the location itself, as well as the amount of time that had elapsed, preventing them from becoming confused in the event of a locational change or a flash-forward. In smaller locations, such as the primary subject's clone's bedroom, panning was USD to establish more context about that character specifically, for instance, it revealed that he was still a child, as evidenced by the LEGO sets scattered around his room, one who, due to his unfortunate circumstances, was having his childhood stripped away from him, In addition, the director attempted to create a contrast between the content lives of other characters irrelevant to the plotline in the film and the dire situation faced by the primary subjects by using long shots. When the director employed the use of a normal long shot, they would show a speeding vehicle that sped by the slow-paced pedestrians of a city to show how on-edge the subject was and how despite his troubles, life continued on for others. Extreme long shots were used when the director was trying to show how the location where the action would take place was lively and colorful, a luxury that the subject of the film could not experience. Wide shots were also used, but instead of only functioning to display a particular location, like that of a long establishing shot, they also revealed key information about the primary subject of the film. In multiple instances, wide shots were used to show the isolation of the subject, both literally and figuratively, both on land and in the ocean, a clear reflection of his internal feelings.
Throughout the film, I noticed that the use of eye-line matches and close-ups of the subject were typically reserved for moments of vulnerability when speaking to a trusted contemporary of his, especially when the topic at hand was a serious subject matter, almost as though the director wanted to the audience to make an emotional connection to their subject and understand where he was coming from. If that wasn't enough proof of the director's intentions already, close-up shots also showed the subject's reactions towards certain situations, the determination, fear, and pain he experienced. Likewise, the same shot and editing combination was used later on in the film as the antagonist began to rationalize his choices, all the while being shown from an undistorting angle, which then allowed the audience to either choose to sympathize with him or at the very least form their own judgments of him, not swayed by the opinions of the subject. The close-ups did also help to reveal certain physical features of the subject, such as his spade tattoo that other characters shared (which had no direct effect on the plot whatsoever), as well as his phone screen to alert the audience of potential threats from early on. For the better part of the movie, there were multiple subjects who remained from and center of each shot which meant that two and three shots, with medium close-up framing, were used in an attempt to relate the dynamic of each character to one another during a conversation, a normal interaction, or one of their introductions to the main group.
In this movie, I noticed that there were quite a few subtle hints regarding the power structure of each side of the conflict. When it came time to portray either a threat to their position or a show of their dominance over a fellow character, the subjects would be shown at a low angle. As for when a younger, subordinate character or one who had been beaten up was shown, a high angle was used to show them in a position of powerlessness and defeat. During the fighting scenes within the film, medium shot framing was used to allow for more emphasis to be put on the emotions of the characters, whilst still giving the audience the chance to lose themselves in the action, something that this fill didn't ever seem to run out of. Over the shoulder shots were also very common and were used for a myriad of different purposes, from being used to capture a spy remaining covert and undetectable to showing a cold and calculating gunman whose emotions were obscured from the audience, painting them out to be an unremorseful killer, and even to allowing an intimate moment to be shared on-screen amidst the hustle and bustle of daily life in the background. Outside of such situations, the director stayed relatively consistent with their use of an eye-level angle.
When looking at camera movements specifically, one will find that throughout the course of the film, zooming in was quickly attributed to a shocking revelation made by a subject, whereas tracking shots were used to capture the raw movement of characters and vehicles. One particular instance being when a tracking show included both the subject and their reflection in a nearby puddle, acting to produce a mirrored effect that played into the very concept of the film, that being that a clone was created of the main subject and was hunting him down. The handheld, shakey effect was also used in conjunction with a point of view shot and panning to simulate the unease the subject experienced as they looked around and when running away from a threat, essentially aiming to have the audience empathize with the subject as they navigated their way through tense moments with uncertain outcomes, something that is quite characteristic of any given science-fiction thriller. By using this effect, the director was also able to make it seem like the subject was hesitating to take action when a shot was settled on one area for an extended period of time.
Sound:
In the movie, non-diegetic ominous music, whose pace would quicken as a threat approached, was used alongside ambient sounds, such as the chirping of crickets at night, to ensure that there was never an unintentional silence. Now, I say intentional silence because there were quite a few moments during the film that the director chose to make nearly devoid of sound entirely. Right before something bad happened in the film, the audience would be subtly keyed into it as silence would loom over the film, the birds would stop chirping, or a character would die, and following this silence, a loud, startling noise that would catch the audience of guard would be heard, such as a gunshot. In underwater scenes, the sound was muted to create a realistic and immersive effect.
Furthermore, any tense, non-diegetic music accompanying a scene would stop temporarily when multiple characters were conversation as to ensure that the audience was aware of what they were discussing, and if a situation had become hopeful, the audio would change to adopt a more uplifting melody. Having said that, we can now shift gears and go back to things the audience could actually hear in the film, the diegetic sounds if you will, and, as I've just stated, dialogue is one of them. In this movie, the dialogue was arguably the most vital source of information as it revealed things regarding the subject's sarcastic disposition with his repeatedly snarky remarks, his solitary background as he had no wife and no kids. It also provided details about the main threat to the subject, which was a "project" run by "Gemini" (even the name of the initiative itself clued the audience into the fact that there would be some kind of double involved since the zodiac sign is comprised of twins) to create a "new breed of soldiers," which hints at the films science fiction undertones and even explained the subject's inability to face himself in a mirror after all that he's done (which is really ironic since the entire film is based around him literally fighting a clone of himself), thereby establishing both the internal troubles of the subject, who was not desensitized to his killings, and the external conflict of fighting his clone. When it came to the subject's clone, the audience was also able to see that he was conditioned to behave in a certain way, one in which affection was quite limited as despite being called son by his adoptive father figure, he was trained to respond with a terse 'yes sir', almost as if he was a trained soldier. Aside from dialogue, I also liked the use of diegetic music to illustrate the comical personality of a secondary subject, as well as the creation of an echo when another character cried out in desperation, hoping to find some sort of solace and reassurance that she wasn't alone when she heard her voice.
Editing:
Over the course of watching the film, I began to notice that there were quite a few editing techniques that seemed to be continuously repeated, likely because they effectively fit the director's vision. One of these editing effects was the use of slow-motion visuals when a threat approached to build suspense, or when the subject would narrowly avoid a split-second hit. Blurring was also used when focusing on a specific gadget, the expression of a particular character, as they cried, for example, and even certain aspects of the set, as it removed the focus from a living subject where the audience's attention would normally drift. I also saw that shot-reverse-shots were often used to capture certain reactions, no matter what a subject's affiliation was in the film, having shown the antagonist as he flinched with a twinge of remorse before returning to the high ground, for instance. Being that thrillers intend to build up tension and suspense, it was essential that these feelings were not disrupted by unnecessary transitions, sp when switching between locations, cross dissolving was used to blend scenes together. On one occasion, it was used for a flashback, which was made clear to the audience by the director's choice to use a black and white filter on scenes from that time. Going back to inter-scene transitions, crosscutting was also used as it did not disturb the natural flow of the film and was able to jump between what was happening with members on either side of the conflict at any given time, whilst also switching in between two fights, so that when there was a lull in one, the audience was put right into the middle of the height of another, keeping them engaged and intrigued.
Another thriller convention I saw in the movie was its use of cutaways before anything gory happened on-screen, as that is something reserved primarily for the horror genre. Now, when speaking in terms of less general editing, I also thought that the hundreds of virtual effects used on Will Smith to produce a "clone" of himself were not only way out of our budget, but overall quite impressive due to their hyperrealism that made it almost believable. Once the film actually came to a close, a fade-out was used, which to me, signaled the official conclusion to the movie, but not to the happy ending that the film's characters would continue to live out.
Mis-Én-Scene:
To me, mis-én-scene is really the make or break of whether or not a movie draws me in and convinces me, at least for a moment that everything I'm seeing on-screen could truly be plausible for all of the events that transpire to not only make sense, but leave a lasting impression on me.
First on the list of mis-én-scene is costumes. In the movie, the antagonists are seen donning black articles of clothing, an indication of their affiliation with the "dark side" (for lack of a better word). At one point in the movie, the subject's clone wore a dark-colored mask, dehumanizing him and painting him out to be the ultimate threat as he had seemingly foregone any sense of compassion that he may have had. This whilst the primary subjects are outfitted in rather casual wear, with the main subject himself actually wearing things like an old, worn-out baseball cap, plain-looking t-shirts, and an informal jacket for most of the movie, which ties into the fact that he leads a modest life. Make-up didn't really have much of an effect in this film as it did not rely on any sort of prosthetics or extravagant make-up looks to drive a point home.
Next up for mis-én-scene is lighting. During the movie, dark settings were used, so lighting was limited to that of which was produced by artificial fixtures. In addition, flashing red lights were present to indicate danger. When outside, natural lighting was used to show that the subject could not escape said danger, no matter the time of day.
After lighting comes acting, which I feel was important in creating both contrasts and parallels between the subject and his clone. From the very beginning of the film, the primary subject was shown to be the type of individual that always counts his blessings and holds deep gratitude for the luck he receives every day. This was indicated by the fact that he lit a candle in memorial for someone who he had assassinated earlier in the day, meaning that despite understanding the need to carry through with the kill, he still holds some sort of respect or remorse for his victims. In addition, the subject is shown speaking comfortably with friends from his past, illustrating that despite feeling alone in terms of the way he feels inside, he is still able to make lasting connections with those around him. Furthermore, since the subject's clone is a younger version of himself, I thought it was interesting that the director chose to make this known by having the older subject be less agile when fighting, whereas his clone was significantly more dextrous and nimble.
As for props, it seemed as though modern-day weaponry, specifically guns, was used the most. There were, of course, small details hidden within the use of other props, like mirrors, which are commonly used when a doppelganger is involved, quite fitting since the movie is about the subject's double, beverages, such as the fact that the subject chose to drink a soda, whereas his former assassination companion opted for a beer, a clear nod to the fact that while, as revealed by dialogue, the subject has not yet come to terms with what he has done in the past, he has not resorted to alcoholism to drown out his troubles and regrets, and even boats, being that the subject was shown on a smaller boat and one of his closest friends was shown on a very large one, making it seem as though the subject is not at all jealous of his friend's successes and is instead content with what he has.
Finally, as I've previously stated, the film is set in a number of different locations worldwide, including a fake training facility, catacombs, and foreign cities. When it came to those locations, the cities were shown to be bright and colorful, acting as a direct contrast with the film's dark tone and eerie premise. In addition, the use of catacombs, an already morbid place to begin with, conveyed a sense of tension, danger, and imminent doom to the audience as that would be the first enclosed location that the subject and his clone would face off in. On occasion, rain would also be shown in the film, acting to express how hopeless the situation had seemed for the subject until things turned around for him.
Takeaways:
When watching movie, I certainly felt that there was a lot that my group members and I could learn from to be able to produce our final task. Looking first at the faults that I found in the film, I'd like to begin by stating that this was a very ambitious project, but I am quite disappointed with its execution. One of the main flaws I found with the film was its use of certain shots, particularly close-ups, to highlight details that were meant to be subtle and make them more obvious. While this may not seem like a poor production choice at first glance, consider that the spade tattoo on the subject's wrist was shown and focused on multiple times only to have no relation to the film at the end of the day. Nothing was revealed about the tattoo that contributed to the storyline in any way, so it made those shots seem like filler whose sole purpose was to make the film longer, not that it needed to be since it was less than five minutes away from hitting the two-hour-long mark. With that being said, my group and I all agreed that we'd personally prefer to see meaningful shots that contain discreet clues within them but don't make them the main focus of the shot so that we can still address more important aspects while still giving the scene "easter eggs" for the audience to pick out and use to try to piece together what they believe might be going on.
Now, this might be personal preference, but I thought the physical combat was excessive at times and actually took away any real substance from the film, as reached the point where I myself began to question where the "thriller" part of the film was, as there was no longer a doubt in my mind, no sort of suspense being created, as to who would triumph in the end because of the movie's predictable and repetitive plot. Moreover, the fact that the film included a flashback is not something that I found bad with it per se, but it is definitely not something that we can include in our video being that we won't have enough time to establish that it is a flashback since we're making the opening to a film. In an effort to not be a complete cynic (today's Wordle word of the day which we got in three tries), I will highlight some of this film's positive characteristics. I did find the acting in the movie to be pretty good and the chemistry between the subjects was quite apparent. Whilst the cross dissolving wasn't my favorite thing, I will agree that it was well-placed in the movie and was effective in maintaining consistency and continuity with its shots. Furthermore, I was also a fan of the film's use of point-of-view shots. While this may not have been the best film ever released, it is certainly one from which we can learn and improve.
You know, after watching this film, I've started to question whether or not I really am the person that I think I am, which I feel that "Weird Al" Yankovic really captured with the statement "I think I'm a clone now" (1988).
No comments:
Post a Comment