Historical and Institutional Influences - Hitchcock and "Psycho"

Ever since the success of first feature-length "talkie" (The Jazz Singer), Hollywood became obsessed with making more and more films with sound. Although the directors and cinematographers were opposed to the idea, the studio heads were more interested in making money by providing a new experience that the audience was fascinated by. Although Hitchcock was walking these "talkies" since 1929, he too was not for the idea. Film was only a visual medium, but with the introduction of sound films began to get boring because of the little effort needed to be put into a "talkie." "Most films, once they could rely on the microphone, became what he called 'pictures of people talking.' Hitchcock stalwartly resisted this development. Throughout his career, he preferred to convey information wordlessly..." (461). In his films he relied on using the camera to tell the story rather than the actors who he did not exactly have a good relationship. Hitchcock treated actors as his puppets unlike other directors who depended on their actors to give a good performance and possibly even improv. Hitchcock was one of the first kind of directors who wanted full control of their productions. For this reason as well, he decided to produce Psycho on his own and with his own money. This sort of investment in his new creation gave him all of the authority he could ask for. He became the master artist. "After all, the film screen, like the canvas of a painting, is flat. But just as a slow walk around a piece of sculpture will reveal its volume, the movement of the camera, or of actors, makes us aware of space" (464). Just like any art mediums, he got the final call to make the creative decisions for the better of the film. For example, he decided to shoot completely in Black and White not only for the cost, but also to get away from the new censorship being placed on movie. He could make the movie as gory as he pleased while still being cost-effective and still having Paramount Pictures distribute the film.

With the release of Psycho, the world saw the rise and popularization of the slasher genre. Hitchcock was a visionary. "So fruitful was he that a single film could spawn an entire genre, as Psycho helped create the
modern horror film" (458). Although the killer's kill-count is not too great, the way it is presented is what makes Psycho a slasher. First of all, the plot revolves around the audience questioning who actually committed the crime. At some times the audience feels like the killer is evident, but then Hitchcock throws a curve ball and therefore making the audience ponder even more. Secondly, from the shower scene we see that the killer's murder weapon is a large knife, which would not only kill the victim but assure that the victim feels the pain. Also, some characters (Norman Bates) seem to have some sort of psychological issues. Not only that, but the ending of the film is a twist. These were some of the early formulas to create a film that can be considered a slasher film. Hitchcock also set the bar for slashers with his visual story telling. He became the master of suspense because he knew how to build tension with merely the music and what is not shown to the audience. Today, where movies would use the cliched "jump scare" Hitchcock would let the tension build up and keep the audience on their toes, never giving them a moment to relax because he wanted the audience to get inside the characters' heads. Today and even a decade after the film's release, Psycho  serves as a great example of visual masterpieces for film students and the average audience as well.


Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slasher_film
hitchcock_canonical_hitchcock.pdf

Hitchcock- Genre and Audience

Before you read this, it is important to know that I have not seen Psycho. Every information in this post is from other sources.

Psycho is a psychological thriller produced and directed by Alfred Hitchcock in 1960. Although it is mainly a psychological thriller, Psycho falls under the slasher sub-genre. Although quite a few people (including me) have not seen the movie, they are familiar with the classic shower scene which has been parodied in modern culture several times.This scene not only illustrates the slasher genre, but also in a way reflect the psychological thriller genre. The slasher in this scene is silhouetted throughout the entire video. This further emphasizes the thriller aspect because the audience is always wondering who this killer is and why he/she would kill this woman.

It is believed that the character of Norman Bates was inspired by Ed Gein. Ed Gein was an American murderer and a body snatcher. He became notorious for his crimes. After the police found body parts at his house in 1957, he was trialed and put into a mental institution. Many psychological thrillers are focused around one character. That character's internal struggle is as important as the external struggle he or she faces.

This movie was directed and produced by Alfred Hitchcock. He made this movie as somewhat a response to the studio system. He made Psycho because he wanted to make something gritty, dark, and just different yet all as inexpensive as possible. He was able to keep the budget at $806,947 which is fairly low for a major motion picture, especially the ones intended to be a major blockbuster. He did not have the backing of a major studio, which is part of the reason he went low budget on this.

By looking the film, we can tell the creators were daring. This is seen through the decision of making the film in black and white. Psycho was one of the only Black and White movies made in 1960. This was a time of the rise of colored films. The audience at this point was more interested in watching colored film than Black and White. Making a Black and White movie showed the confidence the filmmakers had in their creation. Making a Black and White movie was and still is seen as an artistic choice, and it was an artistic choice. By shooting in Black and White, Hitchcock saved money on shooting with film. This also meant that making blood would be cheaper because it would require less detail and some other material could be used.

Hitchcock was not simply known for his work on Psycho. He was known as the "master of suspense" for a reason. He had mastered the art of creating suspense and tension to shock the audience with his earlier films like Dial M for Murder and Spellbound. These both were thrillers, much like many of his previous movies. He was used using dramatic lighting and sound. Everything from sound design to the movement of the camera added to the lighting added a little something to creating a suspenseful mood.

Hitchcock's "target audience was near enough equally split in gender as it can be regarded as a date movie therefore both sexes would be going to see the film," (megsmcg.wordpress.com). The men were attracted to the audience while the women would be interested by the female star. It was believed that women would be able to relate to the female star more and also enjoy the relationship scenes.

From Silents to Studios

Part 1: Explore how the inclusion of sound in the movie pictures impacted the Movie Industry. Detail how it happened, who was effected, what was lost. 

By mid-1920s, the technology to incorporate sound is films had been developed and ready to use. However, major studios were doubtful of this new investment. Firstly, they were not sure if the audience would like sound in films. Also, including sound would mean more money being invested and change of established actors who did not fit the big screen because they accents or their voice didn't match their structure. Overall, including sound would mean a loss for studios who had invested so much in actors and it would also mean more effort would be needed to put into film making. At the time however, a studio by the name of Warner Brothers took the chance on a sound in film. Although executives of Warner Brothers didn't see a future for sound in film, they were struggling to survive and had to try something different from what every studio was currently doing. This meant experimenting with sound eve though most cinemas were not equipped with the appropriate technology. But those that did have sound installed in their cinemas were able to experience the first feature film with sound and dialogue, The Jazz Singer (1927) [the film seen in the clip]. Although only a total of 354 words were spoken and the film consisted mostly of background music, the film captured the public attention and the people were lining up from morning until night to get a glimpse of this new phenomenon. Seeing the success of the Jazz Singer and its successor The Singing Fool, both staring Al Jolson under Warner Brothers, other major studios started building sound stages and creating films known as "talkies."  

The "talkies" sadly ended careers of highly established actors and musicians. Many actors were unable to make the transition in favor of the "talkies." To save themselves, many took voice and diction lessons in hopes to continue their career. Many of the musicians who played the background music in local film theaters  were no longer needed and thus they lost their jobs as well. 

The addition of sound can be considered a step backwards in its early days. Although it appealed to an another sense, it created limitations for the film makers that they had to work around. One of them being the immobilization of cameras. Because the cameras made too much noise, they had to be put in soundproof enclosure. This way the microphones were not able to pick up the noise coming form the camera, but it also meant that it became almost impossible to add camera movements. This resulted in bland shots where and boring films. 


Part 2: The 20 years between 1930 and 1950 are generally recognized as the studio years. Describe what the pros and cons were of this factory system.

The studio/factory system was a type of control after the NPPA guild was ended by the government antitrust action. Studios such as 20th Century FOX, RKO, Warner Brothers, MGM, Paramount, Columbia, and many others created complex sound stages and tuned hundred of acres of land in CA into movie sets. Studio created films in this era just like factory workers made a product. Less time was put into each film and studios demanded more and more films to be made. In this system, a major studio hired a group of stars and a crew to complete films they were assigned. Because of their contract, they were not allowed to work for any other studio.

Although those were hard times for the cast and crew, the Studios became known for the type of films they were constantly distributing. For example, Warner Brother became known for its gangster films while 20th Century Fox became known for its historical and adventure films.

Writing About Film

Article - Writing about Film

A Trip To the Moon (1902) was well known for its use of
innovative animation and special effects 

In this article, Karen Gocsik discusses the important distinctions of analyzing a film from reviewing a film. She talks about the difficulties that doesn't let the audience "see" the film from a technical aspect; rather, audiences are presented with a perfect version of a product that clouds their true view of the film. Because the normal audiences can't "see" the film very well, it is difficult to write a critical film analysis. As mentioned in the article, there are five types of writings. One of the five mentioned is formal analysis. In the formal analysis, the viewers break down the film into small parts and analyze them. In the is analysis, the viewers talks about how those specific sections contribute to the film as a whole. They try to understand the purpose of those parts and determine how successful they were at fulfilling their purpose to the film.

Toy Story was the first feature-length computer-animated film

In addition to the formal analysis, there is an another style of analyzing film known as film history. In this, films are treated as part of our culture's ongoing history where they can contribute to historical events. Films can be seen as reflecting on the time period they were made and go on to influence viewers into believing the ideals of the film; therefore, they can play major role in influencing events. This can also focus on the production histories which often involve production problems' effects on the final product. Additional, it mentions the location or generations of audiences the film was distributed for, and how it contributed to making history or reflected the historical culture it was set in.


The third type of writing is known as the ideological papers. This style analyzes the film to look for underlying themes and messages. These can be the values the filmmakers most likely hold dear to themselves. The messages don't always have to be promoting political beliefs; they can also be trying to promote social and economic beliefs. Such messages can be seen hidden in modern media. Many times the viewer is unaware of the fact that he/she has been manipulated by the filmmakers to feel a certain way about a specific topic he/she may never have thought about before. Discovering these messages can add a whole new level to watching films.

In Cartoon Network's Adventure Time, Finn, a human boy who was found in the wild and adopted by a dog family, is passionate about being a hero. He spends his time rescuing princesses and battling evil monsters and wizards. As far as we know, Finn is the only human in the Land of Ooo." (herocomplex.latimes.com) This is one of many examples of the story being taken place in a post apocalyptic future where Earth has been destroyed after a nuclear war. Click here for more examples 

Another type of writing is cultural studies/national cinemas. In this, films reflect the nation that made them. Films can be analyzed in a way that sets them apart from all the other cultures and nations in the world. It shows the contribution to cinema by the nation that created the film. The stories told might even only apply to that specific region of the world.

Old Bollywood movies and even many, MANY South Indian Films choreographed fight scenes in a way that they might seems comical to us. However, this is an example of cultural differences. Although this is hilarious to us, this is what was (and sadly still is in some films) a standard  for choreographic fight scenes. 

Finally, the fifth kind of writing described in the article is discussion of the auteur. This is based on the auteur theory because in this, the auteur, most often the director, is criticized or praised for the failures or successes of the film. However, the error in this is the creating of a film is a collaborative process. Although the director maybe the most important person on the set, he/she is nothing without the rest of the effort put forth by the cast and crew. Films cannot be treated like books where one author dictates everything in the story. Most often, auteur criticism is used to reflect back on the themes of the previous films by the same director.

Christopher Nolan (director) on the set of The Dark Knight 

Annotating a film sequence involves labeling the technical term of each shot in a sequence using a system of abbreviations. These terms include short terms such as establishing shot and dolly shot to short notes on what the viewer sees such as medium close-up fades into a montage. The benefit of this is that it can help the viewer reflect back on the sequence and pick up on any patterns of camera shots and movements that the filmmakers might have used to tell the story. This allows the viewer to understand how the film was crafted and the effect of the shots on the audience.

To "Think Beyond the Frame" simply means to simply look at aspects of the film and its production that had a lasting impact on you. Thinking beyond the frame makes you not just analyze the film, but the work that went into it. Try thinking of the director who made this film, the time period was set in and the time period it was made and how they might be connected. Wondering the contribution to the modern culture through its theme(s) or source material and why it became popular are two of many ways thinking beyond the frame.

Documentary Pre Production

Purpose: The purpose of our documentary is to inform the audience about a world of children who are in intensive care and want to show their creativeness through the art of filmmaking. They are young and their lives are not as easy as it might have been for us all. Baykids is committed to making a positive difference in the lives of hospitalized children by teaching them a wide range of moviemaking skills and helping them discover the power of self-expression and they need as much help as possible.


Contacts: none respond back yet

Interview Questions:
To Adults:
How did BayKids get started?
How do the kids get funding for their projects?
How can BayKids improve?
What about your job is the most rewarding?
Are there only a certain type of patients that BayKids accepts?

To the kids:
What do you like to do in your free time?
How has filmmaking help you cope with boredom?
What type of movies do you like?
What type of movies have you made yourself?
What do you like best about making videos?

Shot List:
Opening
- LS and ELS of empty streets of SF
- LS of BayKids building

B-Roll
- MS & CU kids with video cameras
- ECU of the eyes of the kids
- kids sitting in bed
- kids going under regular check up (maybe)

Interviews
- MS/CU (don’t know the location yet so it is hard to imagine where everything will be placed)

General Flow:
The documentary will open up with quiet, empty streets. This emphasizes the loss of livelihood missing in the shots. What’s missing are the people and therefore, the children who are facing life threatening conditions in the Baykids hospital. It is very unlikely that the opening will be narrated because we want the interviews to speak for themselves and describe the situation. After the street, the BayKids building will be shown to establish the location and also to show the facility. Most likely, an interviewee’s voice would be heard already and the camera would go to that person describing the location. After an interview with an adult, we will talk to kids and ask their personal opinion on moviemaking. Revlevent B-Roll that we capture will be placed in every interview to illustrate the point even further. The documentary will end with a serious note and most like a text at the end saying that BayKids needs your help.

Scripts:
difficult to make because the contacts have not responded back yet.

Production Schedule:
We will film from the 7-9 of December and dedicate the rest of the week to editing the film to finish by the 14th of December.

Film Trailer Review - World War Z

I remember watching this trailer and this movie is going to be a great action movie or an over-the-top CGI heavy VFX boring time. The definitely got me exited especially because it built up so much tension, but I still have doubts about the movie. However, I will say the trailer of Word War Z did exactly what it set out to do, get the attention of the audience.

With the use of a dialogue sequence in the beginning of the trailer, the trailer manages to set up the back story on the relationship between Brad Pitt's character and his family and explains to the audience why we should care about this guy. The family is just sitting in their car just like thousands of other people stuck in a traffic jam in the city and they try to pass the time by playing some sort of "I Spy" game. We can see that the reason the characters are not worried about this whole situation is because they are not aware of the danger that is yet to come. Very quickly, the mood changes and things begin got change for the worse. For the most part, the trailer tells the story in the order those sequences occur in the film. This is primarily done through dialogue that juxtaposes with the family's struggle to go from a scene of peace (for them) to escaping a hoard of zombies on rooftop. Then it really does become a CGI showreel illustrating some of the major action scenes in the movie. The basic story line can bee seen but none of the big plot points/twists are given away.

Survivalism and destruction can be described as the Mis En Scene. I suppose the filmmaker took the term "wave of zombies" too literally when creating this because it somehow adds a dark humorous overtone to the whole trailer. To me, this literal wave of zombies seems just too much. Maybe the filmmakers were going for this, but again everyone has their own opinions. The film does appear to have a theme of fear and uncertainty as seen through the emotional performances on the rooftop scene and the line the Brad Pitt's character says "I'm coming back."

Cinematography shown in the trailer consists of incredibly quick medium shots, close ups, and POV, but action shots consist of low angles, light angles, long shots, and extreme long shots. For example, when the characters are in a what seems to be in a powerful dialogue shot, the camera is very uptight and personal. This adds a sense of intimacy and shows that the characters care for one another and therefore we, as an audience, should too. In contrast, the camera is placed far away in action shots such as when a truck tips over or a hoard of zombies are trying to climb of a wall. Also, the camera is always moving in these action shots. Even if it is a low angle, the camera will keep moving back as to the say to the audience to be as far away from the zombies as possible, just like the characters have to.

The quickness of the shots help build more tension to the every scene. The editing plays a huge role in setting up the mood for the film through this trailer. It is obvious that the filmmakers want to heighten the need for survival and they do this through quick shots during action sequences. The dialogue scene in the beginning seems it would flow slowly in the film, but for the trailer's purposes it appears to be sped up yet it still retains its initial reason to be in the film--set up the relationship between the family members. Only long shots and extreme long shots are held for more than 4 seconds. This is done to let the audience sync in all the new information being thrown in front of us.

Finally, the sound design plays as in important role, if not more, than the edit. It has a hint of that Inception large ship horn throughout the trailer. The trailer's music begins out almost non-existent. As more information in revealed though the images on the screen, the music begins to get louder and louder. The tempo increases until it finally hits the peak and there is quietness. At its peak, the visuals also are either incredibly calm or at the height of madness. Where the music is quiet, the actors are given the opportunity to deliver lines. Having no distracting music while the characters are delivering important lines emphasizes the importance of those crucial dialogue scenes.

SHELTER: A LOOK AT MANCHESTER’S HOMELESS (Documentary Review)

Shelter is a British documentary which uncovers the reality behind the homelessness issue that is continuously  affects major cities. In this documentary, the filmmaker (Mike Staniforth) only focus on Manchester's homeless residents. Not only does this documentary raise aware of the issue in Manchester, but also does a great job at getting insight on how the homeless feel about the city and their situation. Because of the government budget cuts, the homeless shelters are shutting down leaving more and more people on the street. It's not that these people just don't want to work, the issue is that they don't get the opportunity when these shelters are supposed to aid them shut down. It is clear that the Staniforth wants to set an emotional impact on the audience, which is does. By showing that these people are not the stereotypical "drunkards," but good genuine human beings who feel and are afraid of their situation, Staniforth is able to get the audience to his side. He is out to make people be aware of the situation and do something about it. At the end, Staniforth doesn't just write to donate food, money, or clothes. He also adds to just "Donate Something" which further drives home to point that doing anything to help others in need is doing enough. For this reason, this documentary is meant for anyone and everyone who is willing to do anything no matter what the age. Although it focuses on Manchester, the message clearly applies to nations all of the world. 

The filmmaker makes full use of the material presented in front of him. For example, he doesn't just sit in one location with with interviewee. There are multiple different locations showing the many different lifestyles of the homeless he has encountered. The locations range form a dark isolated deteriorating building to an open street filled with lights and people. Both of these locations show that they are definitely not the ideal place to even walk by at night. That threat of the unknown is always present. From an interview with one unnamed man, we can see that the filmmaker took advantage of whatever that was present in front of him. In the interview, we learn in detail how the man who never drank or did drugs ended up being homeless because he had no family and his company went bankrupt. This whole story was explained by the man in one continuous shot while he was walking, which really does add to the connection the audience makes with this man. You really get to feel for the guy. 

This documentary makes critical choices of what is being recorded in relation to the direct observation by the camera operator. For example, in multiple interviews the camera is set on the interviewee's hands while he talks. This doesn't take away from anything being said by the interviewee; instead, it adds to the weakness we should see in them because of their constant struggle. The hands represent the hard work these men and women on the streets have to do everyday just to keep living when all hope for their future seems to be deteriorating. Even the cover of the video shows a hand laying on what looks to be a rolling bag. Another thing the filmmaker focuses on are the locations. Not only does he show the filthy areas these people have to go, but it also juxtaposes them the beautiful imagery of Manchester. This shows just how much people tend to avoid reality. During interviews, the filmmaker constantly shows clips of police officers standing around the homeless people. This actually creates a powerful image that shows that the police, the men and women who are supposed to protect the people, are turning away the ones who need them the most. This image doesn't just apply to police officers, but also the rest of society as well.

This documentary film does not really combine recorded material with voice-over commentary too much. If there is any commentary, the commentary comes directly form the interviews and never from the filmmaker himself. However, the commentary begins at the very end of the footage which then leads to the interviewers being shown and completing his interview. When raw footage of the city or any other location is shown, there is almost never anyone talking over it. This helps the audience absorb the environment without being bombarded with new information.

For the most part the film keeps everything literal, but there are some examples of symbolic imagery in the film. One shot that I can think of is a low angle shot of light shining from above at night and affected the leaves on a tree. This shot is immediately followed by a light lighting up a sign reading "Caution Hazard Ahead." To me the light represent the future. The future is clear, but the road is not. The leaves being lit up at night symbolize the homeless trying to not just go through the day but also through the night towards an unsure future. The sign shows that the goal if evident, but so are the challenges that need to be faced. Accomplishing something like end of homelessness is not easy, but it could be done one step at a night.

Apart from one shot, the film mostly focuses on individuals and not on interactions. The only example interaction is between the same man who talked about loosing his job with another homeless man sleeping in a corner of a dark street. This is very brief. As he walks and sees a man on the floor, he yells out "Hello stranger" and smiles. There is a wheelchair behind the man sitting lying in the floor. This interaction does not show if these two are friends, but it does show the concern for one another. Although neither can do much to help with other with the situation they are in, the least they can do is show concern, which is all that matters. If we showed some concern, maybe we would be able to do something about it when they could not.

The documentary offers touching information from the subjects. There are no experts, just homeless people struggling to survive and all with a smile on their faces. One man in particular admits to being scared everyday. He believes one day someone will come in at night and just kill him. Through his facial expression, it is clear to the audience that this man truly believes in his heart that someone will kill him at night when he is sleeping. He begins to cry. One interviewee says that there really are good people who have been forced to live on the streets when they have done nothing to deserve it. Some talk with a smile as though they enjoy their life everyday, but that adds to the fact that they know and we know that life isn't so simple. The filmmaker gets his main point across simply through the people he is trying to help. With real life stories and real emotions, the filmmaker completes his job.

This documentary does not have any sort of illustration or any other form of suggestive material to get his point across. There is also no direct to camera address or voice over. The only direct message it does have is at the very end. The text simply explains the situation and pleads the audience to do anything they can to help the homeless shelters and therefore help the homeless live a better life.

Nothing in the film seems staged. The only directed part of the film is probably the man showing the place where he goes to at night to sleep. Other than that, everything is recorded how it was present. The editing of the footage also has not affect to the overall message. Although the interviews are intertwined rather than having one long interview, there is no real connection between the interviewees other than the fact they they are homeless. There is almost no sound when no one is talking as to further emphasize the isolation from civilization. There seems to be no overall aim to guide the choices the filmmaker makes in editing the film as he did.

The camera movement is very minimal. For the most part, the camera only moves when the subject is moving. What the filmmaker does do is change not only his lens, but also the camera for the scenes. For example, there are multiple perspectives of a subject in one interview. While one camera stays on the interviewee's face, the other moves around to get interesting positions and a different view of how others look at the homeless. The lenses are only changed to math the location. During most of the interviews, the camera is very up tight and personal and the interviewee and this is probably when a lens with a long focal length was likely chosen. This creates a deep connection with the audience. As for focus, the only time the interviewee is out of focus is when he is talking and the camera is focused on something significant like his hand. Also, the filmmaker doesn't want to distract the audience with his cinematography skills or his use of color in any way which is why they don't vary too much which keeps the attention on the people being interviewed. This keeps the tone to be serious and shows commitment to this field.

Evaluating this film, I feel it did its job to spread the message it was trying to with great efficiency. The interviews played a major role in getting the audience to get attached emotionally. What I would have liked to see are some statistics or maybe an interview with the normal public to see how they feel about the homeless and what they have done. Although the film got its message across, it did not emphasize it as much as it could have. I know it succeeded in doing what it sought out to do because it made me think of how little I have done to help those who really need help and it motivated me to do something. For this reason, I feel this documentary can affect individuals not only in Manchester, but also in other cities and countries around the world.