Echo is about a young girl who appears to receive a phone call about a horrible accident, however it's later revealed that she is essentially a scam artist. What this film does really well is the way that it completely subverts expectations and presumptions, as at first the spectator feels sorry and nervous for the protagonist, however in only a matter of minutes we then see a different side to her and are repulsed and disgusted by her actions, only for her personal life to be revealed to us which gives us more insight and sympathy towards her.
One thing to note about in terms of the aesthetics of the film is its frequent use of diegetic sound and lack of non-diegetic sound. For instance, the opening scene contains no music or anything, only the sounds of everything that's happening in that moment. This adds to the immersion of this sequence, as this is supposed to be very emotional and takes different turns, and so this makes it more realistic and allows the spectator to focus on what's happening to the central character. Similarly to Operator, this film is really carried by and dependent on performance. Lauren Carse, who portrays the main character Caroline, gives a very good performance. She is terrific at first in the opening, with her overly emotional state, seemingly on the verge of a panic attack. She's incredibly believable, which is necessary as the spectator needs to be able to buy into the fact that those on the street who want to help her believe her story, and we need to be able to at first as well, something which is definitely achieved. Once Caroline gets into the taxi, she sighs quite heavily and her breathing slows down. It's clear that she's relieved to have gotten away with her trickery, however I think it could be interpreted that perhaps she almost started to believe her own acting, and that she had to calm herself down, as there was no way that those on the street would be able to see her face. Outside of this scene, Caroline is somewhat emotionless and monotone. This isn't actually a bad thing, however, as this all links with her upbringing and private life, as it's clear she doesn't get on with her mother very well as seen through their sole encounter together, as well as it being made clear by her brother that their dad did actually perish in a motorcycle accident. One notable scene in terms of cinematography is the exchange between Caroline and her mother. When the camera shows Caroline, we can see her mother in the background, however not all of her, and what we can see is completely out of focus. This helps to accentuate the dynamic between the two of them, there is a clear distance or divide. They don't have a close relationship, maybe she resents her mother for not parenting her well enough, or maybe Caroline is just impossible to cope with. However, these small details are things we never really find out about. The narrative itself is a little lackluster, as it seems like not every detail is as fleshed out and developed as it could be. As the spectator we never truly find out much about the characters. We don't really know Caroline's motive for why she commits these frauds and scams, and we don't know what happened between her and her mother that made their relationship so toxic. Furthermore, no one really develops or grows throughout the course of the film, making the whole narrative feel a little redundant. Obviously there's that incredibly engaging and emotional roller coaster ride of an opening sequence, but beyond that I don't really think that the film is adding anything or has any purpose to exist any longer. Despite this, it can be linked to some narrative theories. The film follows a three act structure, with perhaps the beginning of each act taking place when each scam (however it is implied that the last one that we see could actually be real and what she has based her scam on) begins, as we see it repeated three times throughout. Levi-Strauss could possibly be linked here, as the binary opposites of Truth and Fiction are on display here, as the spectator is constantly misled on what's true and what isn't. Barthes' enigma code is also prevalent in Echo, as the spectator is not given every single piece of information, details about characters, context and relationships are kept from us and adds further questions to be asked. Echo is definitely an engaging and emotional film, which is filled with really solid performances and an intriguing premise which is delivered with a fantastic opening scene. This great promise that the film shows early on is unfortunately followed by about 10 minutes of practically nothing, none of the characters grow or change, we don't really learn anything, and so makes everything post the opening feel incredibly unnecessary and underwhelming when considering how strong that first scene is. This could have been one of the stronger of the eight short films, however it's brutally let down following it's opening and ends up being one of the weaker ones.
0 Comments
The Ellington Kid presents two stories to the spectator. Two boys go to a kebab shop, where one tells the other about an incident involving a kid who got stabbed and was chased into that same kebab shop by those who stabbed him, leading to a fight with the owners. The film as a whole has a very clear visual style, relying on lots of camera movement as well as slow motion, however the film itself is pretty vacuous and seemingly has no real purpose or weight to it.
The film's opening shots act as heavy foreshadowing for the payoff that comes at the end of the film, with shots of knives being sharpened and meat being chopped up. The editing is very quick throughout the film, with lots of quick cuts and short shot duration, giving the film a fast pace and adding to the action packed nature of the film, making it more exciting to the spectator. Again in terms of editing, there are a few moments of slow motion within the film, almost to an irritating degree. I suppose this is intended to add fear and tension to the scene in the most cliche of ways, however I just found it to be awfully cheap and unprofessional, damning the respectability of the film making. The performances are also a little lackluster, however the guy who is telling the story is engaging and brilliantly sells the events to both the character and the spectator, however the person listening feels incredibly distant and disinterested from the story, as well as everyone else seeming to be too over the top and exaggerated, which could work but it often comes when the film is trying to be serious and grounded, leading to a jarring contrast. The camerawork is quite interesting, as the camera is still and doesn't move in the scene with the story being told, but when we see the story itself the camera is constantly moving with lots of handheld shots on display. This adds to the action that's on screen, adding tension and excitement. The camera does move towards the end of the scene with the two boys, when it pans across to the man sharpening his knives with a comical grin on his face. The use of camera movement perhaps suggest that the story was not as fake as it perhaps appears to be, and that there's more truth to it than they think, and the camera movement enforces this by suggesting that the story is still going on. There's very little to say about it in terms of the narrative, as the film doesn't have any real point that it's trying to make whatsoever. The narrative itself is fairly uninteresting, and is rounded off with an unbelievably predictable and unsatisfying payoff, making me feel almost as if the film didn't end or was just unfinished and rushed. The story just isn't very interesting, it's heavily cliched, predictable and without meaning, emotional weight or purpose. I can't really think of any narrative theories to apply. Perhaps Barthes' enigma code could be applied, due to the fact that we never truly know how accurate or truthful the story being told actually is, however this ambiguity is soured by the ending. The Ellington Kid has its obvious fair share of action and tension, as well as one or two decent performances. However, the film itself is void of any substance or depth, leading the whole thing to be incredibly dull and have a complete lack of profoundness, as well as being tonally inconsistent, undecided on if its serious or witty. Even the camerawork and editing isn't that interesting, instead its just cliche and unoriginal, offering absolutely nothing engaging or surprising. Tight Jeans is a film that is, on the surface, nothing more than about three boys talking while waiting for their friend. However, this film has a lot of interesting themes that are explored through the boys' conversation, most notably themes and ideas of race and culture.
In terms of the visual presentation of the film, there isn't much on display that's particularly groundbreaking or interesting. The cinematography is mainly comprised of medium shots and some particular close ups. The film also opens with a montage sequence showing people shopping at a market, perhaps highlighting the urban society and the area in which the three central characters are living, an idea which is enforced by some urban hip-hop music, adding a sense of life and soul to the setting. The dialogue is what really drives the film, similarly to Operator, in the sense that the visual presentation isn't particularly important but every line of dialogue really is. Their conversation really goes off in many directions, to the point where you almost forget how they even began to talk about certain things, with their main topics of discussion linking with ideas of culture and racial identity. The language that the three characters use is full of slang terms and colloquial lexis, again adding to the urban feel of the setting and the film itself, as well as perhaps affirming the friendship and bond of the characters. Narratively speaking this film is also interesting, mainly in the fact that nothing really happens of any significance, all that takes place is three guys having a conversation, where no real important or memorable event really happens to the characters. Due to this, a theory involving narrative structure can't really be applied. Todorov doesn't really work because there isn't really a beginning or end and there doesn't seem to be any obvious act structure. Propp is also difficult to apply as the characters don't really do anything, and don't serve much function in terms of the overall narrative, all they do is have a conversation. Levi-Strauss could, however, be applied as the film's narrative is an exploration of themes and ideas more than attempting to convey an exciting or action-packed story. One binary opposite that could be evident is the idea of race and white culture vs black culture. The boys discuss things like black history and how white people have viewed them over time, as well as whether they prefer white girls or black girls. This idea is prevalent throughout the film, it's what they talk about more than anything, and each of them has their own idea and view of what they think. I think Tight Jeans is a very strong exploration of ideas and themes, giving the film an obvious purpose and point that it wants to make. While the film is not particularly interesting or exciting visually and even narrative wise, its themes and ideas are carried by dialogue and strong performances that keep the film afloat. Over is very obviously the most experimental of the short films, very slowly presenting a crime scene to the spectator in reverse chronological order. This is conveyed through multiple medium shots each with a long shot duration, asking the spectator to be very patient as they wait for the questions to be answered as the mystery unravels. However, it is presented in a very slow pace, and does cause some level of engagement and emotional attachment to the narrative to be lost.
In terms of the visuals of the film, there is an abundance of very long wide shots on display. Each shot is set at a different time of the day, and each shot allows the spectator to try and put all the pieces of the puzzle together. The intended effect is clearly to add tension and hold the spectator's engagement, hoping to get them to try to want and discover what's going on and what the cause of the man's death was, however instead I found the slow moving pace to be sluggish and rather dull, causing my investment to dissipate. The shot duration is very long for the most part, with very few cuts and some shots lasting for minutes, however there are some shorter shot durations, mainly when police evidence is being shown to the spectator. The use of sound is interesting as well. All the sounds within the film are diegetic, adding to the realism and aiming to keep the spectator more immersed in the mystery and investigation, as well as adding to the fact that the film is based on true events, meaning it has to stay true to realism. The dialogue is very often difficult to hear, allowing the spectator to rely on visuals more than audio in order to stay engaged in the story and to try and work out what's going on and what's happened. It all allows the spectator to work out exactly what's happening for themselves, they're not given tools like audio cues to aid them, instead they rely on the mise-en-scène in order to try and piece events together. There are many interesting aesthetic choices made, however in the end it does seem somewhat style over substance, as this unique direction is at the detriment of an engaging narrative deliverance. In terms of the way that this narrative is presented, it is quite difficult to associate it with a theory, as it is told in reverse and so therefore it's not quite linear or chronological. Roland Barthes' idea of narrative codes, most notably the enigma code, could be applied here, however, as the mystery is revealed very slowly, and the film hides an awful lot of information from the spectator, leading to a text track coming up at the end explaining the events that occurred and what actually took place, solving the mystery for the spectator and providing them with answers to their questions. The semic code could also perhaps be applied, as the spectator picks up on connotations when they are presented with certain visuals, such as the flowers on the ground and the constantly patrolling police, allowing them to assume that a proposed crime has taken place, due to the police dominating many shots throughout the film. Over is definitely an interesting film, in terms of both its visual presentation and reverse chronological timeline. However, by doing this it does sacrifice the engagement of an engaging and surprising story. The film is certainly unpredictable and has many surprises, however I just personally wasn't emotionally invested and didn't think that the slow burn that has to be ensured was worth it despite a satisfying and shocking payoff. Daniel Montanarini's The Arrival follows a very simple narrative, involving a woman getting coffee and contemplating her pregnancy before telling the father of the child. However, the film goes about presenting this narrative in an incredibly interesting way, only revealing to the spectator the woman's inner thoughts and allowing to discover more and more information as the film goes on. It is similar to Operator in the sense that it wants its spectator to focus predominately on audio, however its visual presentation is incredibly interesting and intellectual.
Aesthetically, there is so much to talk about with The Arrival. First of all and most notably, the entire short is presented in one long take. It starts as a medium shot but slowly creeps in on the woman as she starts to consider whether or not she wants to keep her child, eventually becoming a close up, allowing us to see her raw emotions. This all allows the spectator to experience this in real time, giving the effect of how the mind works, and how you can be set and determined on one thing, however circumstances can change this. In this case, this circumstance is when she sees a baby walk in to the coffee shop, causing her to change her mind and want to keep her child instead of opting for an abortion, which is what she heavily hints at up to this point. The long take also allows us to really connect with her. By Montanarini decidng to not once cut away from her, we feel as if we are with her on every decision she is making. We are more engaged in her own personal story because of this as we are here with her as she thinks about what she wants to do. This idea of her making a decision and changing it is enforced by her choice of what to drink. Initially she orders a regular coffee with caffeine in it, however she then starts to regret this momentarily, but then quickly decides that it won't make much of a difference and does't really matter. However, after she accidentally overfills her drink with milk after getting distracted by the baby, she orders a decaf coffee instead, changing her mind. The regular coffee she orders represents her getting an abortion. The sugar would be bad for her body, and perhaps getting an abortion would be bad on her conscience. She would regret it for the rest of her life, whereas ordering the decaf is perhaps the safer option as no one is getting hurt from it, similarly to her keeping the baby. As the camera creeps forward, the aspect ratio shifts, making the events feel much more personal and blocking out her surroundings. The lighting also turns much darker and low-key, also helping to block her surroundings out, only making the spectator focus on her face and her emotions as she begins to change her mind. The cafe itself then seemingly morphs into a train, as we hear the sound of a train moving as well as the lights shining from one booth to the next. This could quite clearly link to the phrase 'train of thought', as that is exactly what this narrative is following - the woman's train of thought. However, it could also perhaps be a metaphor for the journey that she about to embark upon as she makes the decision to keep her child instead of aborting it. A vast amount can also be said about the narrative of The Arrival. As I said, the narrative itself is not all that complex, as the events of the film take the same amount of time as the film itself due to it being presented in real time. To associate it with theory is very difficult, there's only one real character that you can analyse, the setting never really changes, and there aren't any monumental or important physical events. Todorov's theory could attempt to be applied, as there is an equilibrium to begin with as she is happy with her current decision, however there are multiple disruptions when a couple walk in as well as a baby enters later causing her to reconsider her decision. She then recognises this and begins to reconsider, leading to an inner conflict with herself, causing a new equilibrium as she then changes her mind. The film doesn't give us an answer to what happens after she makes her decision, all the spectator sees is a linear presentation of her playing with the thoughts in her mind, and how they shift and alter due to her physical surroundings and contemplation of potential future events. To me, this is the strongest of the eight short films. Montanarini's direction is incredibly clever and thought-provoking, leaving a lot up to the spectator while also giving them so much. The film wants us to focus on the audio, as that's how her thoughts are being conveyed, however the visual presentation, from the use of one long take and the train metaphor, allows the director to present so many ideas and engaging the spectator in an emotional way, adding more and more tension about what her final decision is going to be. The Fly is a short film directed by Olly Williams, which is about a getaway driver attempting to get rid of an irritating fly in anyway he can. This film is very different from Operator, in both its tone, narrative and visual presentation. This short film is more of an absurdist black comedy than anything else, whereas Operator is more of a serious drama. This film is much more
light hearted in tone, as the film gets more and more ridiculous as the getaway driver gets more and more infuriated by the fly, to the point where he destroys his own car just to make any attempt to get rid of the fly. One obviously notable difference between this and Operator is its cinematography. While in Operator there were many long takes and little camera movement, in this the shots are much shorter in terms of duration and there is a more frequent amount of camera movement, as it appears many of the shots are handheld, whereas Operator consisted mainly of tracking or still shots. The editing is also different - as in this film the shot duration is much shorter and cuts are far more frequent, giving the film a very fast pace and engaging the spectator as the rather ridiculous events unfold, whereas Operator consisted of long shot duration and fewer cuts. Similarly to Operator, The Fly predominantly uses diegetic sound, with the only non-diegetic sound use being the short title sequence and the closing credits. This also adds to the realism of the short film, making it more engaging to the spectator. In terms of shot types, this film is also mainly comprised of many close ups. This makes the film feel very personal and claustrophobic, which is similar to how the driver is feeling as he is stuck in his car with a fly. This film is also driven by the performance by the central character, which is very over-dramatic and slapstick in nature, which is the exact tone that the overall film has. In terms of the narrative of this short film, the film follows a simple linear three act structure to that of Operator. Some of Propp's character functions could be applied here, as the fl would likely be the hero as it prevents the bank robbery from being a success and in the end helps the police. This would then make perhaps the police false hero, and the driver and the rest of the bank robbers the villain. However, the remaining character functions are a little difficult to fill in. Todorov's narrative theory could quite easily be applied to The Fly, as it has an equilibrium to begin with, which is then disrupted by the fly, causing the driver to recognise this and cause a conflict with the fly, leading to a new equilibrium at the end as they are caught by the police. The Fly is very different from Operator in terms of their tones and genres, as this is more of a ridiculous comedy whereas Operator is a serious drama, however they are both carried through strong single character performances, however The Fly utilises its micro-elements further than Operator does, by using much more interesting camerawork and cinematography, as well as much faster editing in order to make the film more fast paced and funny, in contrast to Operator's more tense and somber tone. Operator is a short film directed by Caroline Bartleet, detailing an emergency services operator helping to guide a mother and her child who are trapped inside their burning house. This short is intensely emotional and unbelievably tense, positioning the spectator in a powerless state, similar to that of the operator herself, as all we are left to do is listen and focus on the dialogue we are provided with, hoping that the mother and her son can survive.
The way in which Bartleet uses cinematography in Operator is very interesting. The camera is practically always positioned very close to the operator's face, giving the spectator a frequent amount of close ups and reaction shots. This allows us to really get inside the mind of the operator and get a sense of what she's feeling and going through, and makes for the film to be carried out by the performance which only elevates the tension, as you can see that the operator is clearly inside worried and panicking but has to appear calm in order to keep the mother on the end of the line calm also. The camera also doesn't move all that much; when it does it is through slow tracking shots. The fact that there is little camera movement allows the film to become more engaging as well as personal, as it doesn't distract the spectator from the camera constantly moving, and the fact that the camera is so close as well as not moving allows the spectator to feel as if they are experiencing everything happening with the operator, as if they're a part of it. It makes the spectator focus on the dialogue and not become focus on the camerawork and its movement, as there is very little of it, and the experience of the film is a more imaginable one, as we are imagining what the people on the other end of the line are experiencing - which is built and expanded by the dialogue and what the spectator hears, and so it wouldn't make sense for there to be a vast amount of camera movement as it would take away from this. In terms of the editing, there is a very long shot duration as well as an infrequent amount of cuts. This also makes the film more engaging, as we are showing one particular shot for a long amount of time, which doesn't cause a jarring viewing experience as nothing changed very much, as well as making it more tense as it makes us focus our full attention on the call and not pay much attention to what Bartleet is presenting us with visually. The use of sound in Operator is predominately diegetic, making the film much more realistic and grounded which adds to the immersion, however there is perhaps a small use of non-diegetic sound when the call goes silent and we hear a high pitched noise which seems to be a sound effect added in editing, however it could maybe be the static on the headphones and therefore a diegetic sound, regardless this small scene also adds a lot of tension, as it manipulates the spectator into thinking that the caller had been killed. There is also a lot to say about how the film works in terms of narrative. Throughout the film, the spectator is positioned to see the events of everything through the operator herself, and so her struggle and the effects of her job and career is what Bartleet is attempting to expose. After she is finished with this call, a call which would mentally scar anyone not doing her job, she relaxes for a brief few seconds before having to answer another one - acting as if her previous call was essentially nothing but a normal day at the office. Levi-Strauss' theory of binary opposites can be applied to this short film, for instance if you look at the idea of Man vs Nature, as the woman on the other end of the call is struggling against fire, a strong force of nature that she can't do much about, and we are focused on the operator entirely, and so we as the spectator are left powerless to only hope that nature will not take its toll on humanity. In terms of the narrative structure of the film, it is a fairly conventional three act linear structure. The first act is the opening all the way to perhaps when the call first goes silent, which could act as an indicator for the second act beginning, and the film perhaps enters its third act as they await the help of the firefighters. The film certainly follows a linear structure, as the operator's call begins with her first talking to the mother and ends with her ending the call, however it could be seen as a cyclical narrative at the end as she then answers another call. Operator is a very close and emotional look at what it's like to have to work as an emergency services operator, highlighting the amount of psychological trauma it can cause and what these people have to deal with on a daily basis. The way it is somewhat slow in its pacing and shot duration only help to make the film an incredibly tense and stressful viewing experience, allowing us to feel as if we are following these events with the operator - an idea which is bolstered by such a strong and emotionally deep central performance which hooks the spectator and keeps them engaged until the very end. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |