Both the Man with a Movie Camera and the Bicycle Thief are an example of Tradition of Formalism, however, they different in the techniques used. The Man with a Moving Camera is an example of Pudovkin and Eisenstein's idea of Constructive editing in formalism. They believed that the meaning was created by the juxtaposition rather than the shots. In their perspective the artistry lies not on the materials, but in the way they are taken apart and put back together. For example from 1:23 to 1:56 the empty chairs is one concept and the people coming into the theater is another.
By contrasting the two a new meaning is created. It emphasizes that the people like going to the theater because all the chairs are being used, one by one, but eventually the theater is full.
This scene also shows how the chairs and people are not what create the meaning, but the edit is. By putting together these shots you are creating something beyond the images; you are putting meaning to the scene. In addition, the close-up shots obligate the audience to look at a specific shot provoking a particular emotion. For instance, 3:42 to 4:19 you see young kids sleeping on the street and later the contrast shot of the houses tell a story, provoking sadness in the audience. It shows how even though there are many houses innocent young kids have no where to sleep, which is an example of reality.
However, Andre Bazin disapproved of constructive cutting because he believed it destroyed the effectiveness of the scene. He thought reality in film was accomplished through long shots, wide screen, lengthy takes, and deep focus, instead of individual shots. For example, (0:00 to 0:15) shows the man walking with his son, there are no cuts, the camera follows them creating a sense of realism.
Another lengthy take (1:02-1:21) shows the indecision going through the man's head; he doesn't know if he should go for the bicycle or not and decides to sit for a moment. The audience understands the confusion without any cutting or use of different angles. In addition, when he's sitting down the audience has the power to choose who to focus on; the man or the boy. This concept of allowing the audience to chose who to look at relates more to realism because that's what people do when they're on the street.
The wide shot is not forcing an emotion, on the contrary it gives freedom to feel different emotions. Although in most of the film there almost no individual shots, the few individual shots like in 6:18 to 6:40 are so powerful. Bazin says it's okay to use individual shots only if you need to portray an emotion of isolation, sadness. In this case the shot of the father shows his shame and sorrow and then the shot of the kid demonstrates his emotions, mostly sadness. But the moment the kids grabs his father's hand it creates a strong meaning. It implies that he's not alone; he supports his father no matter what. And then it goes back to a full shot to close the scene.
This scene also shows how the chairs and people are not what create the meaning, but the edit is. By putting together these shots you are creating something beyond the images; you are putting meaning to the scene. In addition, the close-up shots obligate the audience to look at a specific shot provoking a particular emotion. For instance, 3:42 to 4:19 you see young kids sleeping on the street and later the contrast shot of the houses tell a story, provoking sadness in the audience. It shows how even though there are many houses innocent young kids have no where to sleep, which is an example of reality.
However, Andre Bazin disapproved of constructive cutting because he believed it destroyed the effectiveness of the scene. He thought reality in film was accomplished through long shots, wide screen, lengthy takes, and deep focus, instead of individual shots. For example, (0:00 to 0:15) shows the man walking with his son, there are no cuts, the camera follows them creating a sense of realism.
Another lengthy take (1:02-1:21) shows the indecision going through the man's head; he doesn't know if he should go for the bicycle or not and decides to sit for a moment. The audience understands the confusion without any cutting or use of different angles. In addition, when he's sitting down the audience has the power to choose who to focus on; the man or the boy. This concept of allowing the audience to chose who to look at relates more to realism because that's what people do when they're on the street.
The wide shot is not forcing an emotion, on the contrary it gives freedom to feel different emotions. Although in most of the film there almost no individual shots, the few individual shots like in 6:18 to 6:40 are so powerful. Bazin says it's okay to use individual shots only if you need to portray an emotion of isolation, sadness. In this case the shot of the father shows his shame and sorrow and then the shot of the kid demonstrates his emotions, mostly sadness. But the moment the kids grabs his father's hand it creates a strong meaning. It implies that he's not alone; he supports his father no matter what. And then it goes back to a full shot to close the scene.
No comments:
Post a Comment