Kehoe: Editing in "Let Me In"

I recently viewed the film Let Me In, which is about a young boy who is ignored at home and bullied at school but befriends a mysterious girl who turns out to be a vampire. The film’s use of editing is excellent and apparent from the first scene, which opens upon a man jumping to his death out of his hospital window in the dead of night, nurses and police rush into the room only to find a broken window and the mysterious message “I’m sorry Abbey” written on a pad of paper. The next scene is in bright daylight with the subtitle “one week earlier.” The film’s editors had good reason to begin the film with the hospital scene and then flashback a week in the next scene. This flashback technique acts as a hook to grab the audience’s interest. In the first scene, the audience does not know who Abbey is, or why the man jumps to his death; all the audience is given is the assurance that these questions will be answered by viewing the events of the previous seven days.
Another notable editing technique is the angle and proximity of the camera in the scenes with Owen and his mother. Owen is the film’s protagonist, and is the constant target of bullying at school. In the scenes where Owen is talking to his mother, the camera is placed in such a way to make Owen’s mother blurry and out of focus. This is to represent how his mother is neglectful of Owen and his problems.

Quentin, Jackass 3D

My friends and I went to see Jackass 3D over the break because there was a big fuzz about it and lots of my friends advised me to go see it. It ended up being really disappointing because most of the things the actors/stunt men do is related to nasty things. People getting hurt is funny to watch but people bungee jumping in a portable toilet full of crap is just too much. This movie is part of a trilogy and to me, it was the worst of all. The use of 3D was not very helpful in enhancing the quality of the movie.

I thought some parts of it were hilarious such as the part when Johny Knoxville, the most famous character of all runs away from a dog and tries to climb a pole and gets his butt chewed on. I think that what makes this a good movie to the audience is that the director did a great job editing. All in all, the movie is just made of many shots taken of the casting doing crazy stunts and those are simple shots just taken from the ground or from different angle around the character at eye level. In order to make people laugh even more and really enjoy each scenes, the director slow motioned every scenes where someone is about to get hurt or crash into something and we can really observe everything such as the face expressions and the motion of the body after being hit. Even though the grossness of the movie really made me dislike it, I think that they did a great job editing the film. The directors said in an interview that they were able to do this thanks to the new technology that they got in filming. The use of angle shots and lights were also well placed along the film. Jackass started as a TV show and is now one of the biggest box office. I do not know what is wrong with our generation. We enjoy watching people getting hurt, and getting covered in crap just for our entertainment. I really think that cinema is changing with time. Back then, this kind of movie would have been banned and prohibited from being released. I guess the tables have turned.

Falanga, I Am Love

I recently watched I Am Love by Luca Guadagnino which is an Italian made love story about a woman in her 40's stuck in a social status and relationship she no longer wants to be a part of. The Ideology was that of describing what morals are in place in a love relationship and how commitment and truth effect how well the relationship will work out. The sexual play in the film illustrates the concept of making love as both a physical and spiritual experience. The editing perfectly illustrates this point as gargoyles, statues, flowers, clouds, street lights, mansions are all used as symbolic representations in particular scenes as the symbols are used for jump cuts. One scene in particular goes from a sexual encounter with Emma(Tilda Swinton) and her lover and while that is happening the image will briefly cut to bees around a flower or a waterfall to fill in the void of the audience's perception of what these characters are feeling and why everything the main character does is "natural" as all her actions are motivated by love. The beautiful imagery of nature and the outdoors is contrasted with the dark Gothic mansion she lives in illustrates her separate lives and where she wants to be. The editing is a huge part of this movie because of how the film plays out in interconnecting metaphors with unique cuts and shots to the emotions of the characters. The shots were not long but the use of close ups made the audience pay attention to emotion rather than details of the setting or other characters. This unique film told a love story through its' editing and score more than any other way because of its brilliant cinematography, shot selection, and running metaphors whilst the score by John Adams sets the tone and mood through his classic tracks more than most scores on any other film.

Griffin: The Social Network

My preconceptions before viewing “The Social Network” (David Fincher 2010) were that it would be a highly paced, over-sexualized blockbuster with an overload of special effects, but it turned out to be none of those things. Rather, the film is an in-depth chronicle of the origins and development of Facebook, but more principally, the film is about the characters that created Facebook, fought over it, were changed by it or were destroyed in the process.

The story unfolds in Harvard dorm rooms of the co-founders, Eisenberg’s Mark Zuckerberg and Garfield’s Eduardo Saverin. These scenes make up the past tense as it were of the film, while extended deposition scenes make up the present and set up future events while exploring the conflicts set up in the dorm room days. Though the film portrays several years of events, the editing is clever and quick so the narrative never loses momentum or becomes too convoluted. Often, the film cuts back and forth between deposition scenes with aloof Zuckerberg or the haughty and stubborn Winklevoss twins and scenes where these very characters first met or are fighting, etc. So the technique of juxtaposing past and present and future events is one of the film’s key elements for establishing tension and suspense.

Another facet that lends “The Social Network” credibility is Aaron Sorkin’s adapted screenplay. As in his writing for “The West Wing”, the dialogue is quick, witty, sharp, sarcastic and comedic when necessary. The opening scene of the film is Zuckerberg and his girlfriend drinking at a college bar. Her unrequited love forms one of his key personal conflicts throughout the film, which grows into the notion that Zuckerberg is just a nerd who never had a real girlfriend and his invention of Facebook compensated for weakness he felt in himself. But the opening scene is a sprightly and sardonic exchange of words which embody Sorkin’s style and abilities. Having such a skilled writer of dialogue like Sorkin is critical for this movie because so much of it happens in boardrooms and over long wooden tables with lawyers.

Catch-22

I tried to read the book a long time ago, but never could actually finish it. Recently, I saw this movie was on instant play on Netflix, so I decided to watch it. Catch-22 is defined in this movie as the armies tricky way of keeping its pilots in the war. A pilot can leave the military if he is crazy. If the pilot claims he is crazy, then he has the grant to leave the war. The catch is that the soldier would be considered sane if he did not want to fly, yet insane if he does consider to fly. Therefore, he cannot leave the military because the moment he decides not to fly the plane any more he is sane.
There are famous actors in this movie. Alan Arkin plays the protagonist who sees the backwardness in the military and cannot get out of the catch. Arkin is the only character who sees the insanity in the war, but he has to bare insanity due to the troubles of war. Young Martin Sheen plays a fellow pilot. Jon Voight plays some sort of high officer who tries to capitalize on the resources found in America's base in Italy. Orson Welles plays a high ranking general who visits the base and has no real compassion for anything or anyone. There is even a small role for the beautiful voiced Art Garfunkel in the movie. I would consider Alan Arkin, Martin Sheen, and Jon Voight professional actors. Since this is a dark humour movie, the acting can be a bit goofy and unrealistic at times. The attitudes given about war in this movie is horrifying; a plane crashes in one scene and the two actors (Jon Voight and Martin Balsmin) do not even look at the incident. Generals raise the ante for air bombings, keeping the soldiers in Italy for an uncertain amount of time due to his ability to raise the number at any time. Even though the humor is dark, it still rubs at me in a strange way. The humor is just different because the movie is 40 years old, but I enjoyed it anyway.
The editing in this movie is psychologically stimulating. Scenes could be dreams, or scenes could be reality. The movie plays with reality in its style of editing. After Arkin gets a sheet metal in his leg, the movie switches to his subconscious. He is trying to help someone else who has hurt his leg, but then it cuts to his sexual drive. He is trying to swim to the nurse that is helping him with his leg. He is stuck out at war with no one to be intimate with. The only real intimacy is the intense conversations that the soldiers have with each other. There is a scene where it is cut from Alan Arkin trying to caress a girl to him in the middle of a strategic meeting.
The movie is purposely edited to leave the viewer out in the dark, questioning what is real. There is no guiding story line, just scenes of what is happening. Catch-22 is one of those movies that you have to watch twice or even three times to pick up on the subtleties. I have watch it twice now and feel like i have a some-what good understanding of it.

Becnel Beowulf and the Mermaid

After this sea monster battle scene, the scene that I feel needs further editing begins.

The scene in Beowulf that needs more editing, in my opinion, is the scene where Beowulf, while swimming against Breka and after battling the sea monsters, is pulled under water by the mermaid (26:35-27:02). He doesn't tell the Danes that a mermaid pulled him under; he instead tells them that a monster pulled him under and that he killed the monster. His inability to kill or resist the mermaid is a foreshadowing of his being lured in by Grendel's mother and his mistake of not killing her, which proves to be Beowulf's downfall. In the scene, the mermaid reveals her self to Beowulf and swims to embrace him. The way the mermaid swims is not very fluid or smooth and resembles graphics from a bad early video game in comparison to the rest of the animation in the movie. Even though it is a short scene, if it was edited properly it would have added more to the film.

The Mis En Scene of the mermaid scene:

Dominant: The dominant in the scene is the mermaid. Our eyes are drawn to her first and for the longest amount of time. We are intrigued by her; Beowulf said he fought a monster, not a beautiful mermaid and we are curious to see what happens.

Lighting Key: The lighting is very low and the scene is comprised of dark colors: the deep blue/green of the sea and the darkness of the depth of the sea.

Shot and Camera Proxemics: The camera is at first far away( a social to public proxemic) from the mermaid, but as she reveals herself and swims towards Beowulf, the shot becomes more of a close-up (an intimate proxemic).

Angle: The camera is level for most of the scene, but slightly tilted down when she comes up to Beowulf, as if we are seeing her from his eyes.

Color Values: The dominant colors are the dark blue/greens of the ocean. The darkness also helps with the foreshadowing of Beowulf's downfall (his inability to resist or kill bewitching women).

Lens/Filter/Stock: The scene had a cloudy look to it when the mermaid was revealing herself.

Subsidiary Contrast: The second thing that catches our eye, after the mermaid, in the scene is Beowulf. The last thing our eye focuses on is Beowulf's sword falling to the bottom of the sea.

Density: There is not too much visual information in this scene. The mermaid and Beowulf's encounter gives information, but it is just the empty sea background and them in the scene.

Composition: The background ( the sea) and the middle and fore ground seem to blend in together.

Form: The form is open and natural. It does not seem to be closed or stylized. Not taking the fact that this scene needs more editing into consideration, it does have more of a natural feel than a fake or choreographed feel.

Framing: The framing is loose; the characters are allowed to move around the scene freely.

Depth: Even though the movie is animated to feel like a 3D film, this scene seems very 2D.

Character Placement: The mermaid occupied the center, the left, and the lower center of the scene, whereas Beowulf occupied the upper right and center of the scene.

Staging Positions: The characters do not look into the camera. The mermaid looks towards the camera, but not directly into it. Beowulf looks at the mermaid, and at one point has his back towards the camera.

Character Proximics: The characters start off in a social proxemic, end up in intimate proxemics from one another, when they embrace.

McCay: Beowulf Blog Prompt

Choose a scene from Beowulf that needs further editing or enhancing and do an analysis of how you would change the scene. Do not forget to post a picture. Your mise en scene analysis should point out the weakness in the scene.

Villacreces, Wolfman Transformation and the Evolution of Filmmaking

VS.

Wolfman (2010)           Wolfman (1941)

It's been 69 years since director George Waggner made the first Wolfman movie. Technology and filmmaking have evolved ever since.  Because of this reason director Joe Johnston remade the movie. There are certainly a lot of differences between both movies, but what strikes the viewers the most is the  transformation from man to werewolf. 

In the 1941 version, you see  Larry Talbot struggling with fear, shame, and uncomfortability towards himself. He hides from people and does not know what is going on. As he removes his clothing, the frame present a change in his feet and nails, when in a different scene you see the changes in his face. the filmmakers were able to present this change by good editing. They changed his appearance frame by frame. 

On the other hand in the 2010 version of Wolfman, Lawrence Talbot has a  different reaction to the change. He fells angry, it seems as if the anger of the wolf is causing this change. You see a sense of unconfortability, but no fear. In the scene in which the doctors are examining what changes the full moon could make him have, he is angry and seeks revenge. The visual effects in the scene are made thanks to CGI. It is all computer animated. The advantage of computer animation is that you are able to see all the changes in his body, starting from his feet  to his eyes. There is detail, and the transformation is more real.

Both portray the transformation of the Wolfman using the technology that each time frame had in their power. The 1941 version could not presented more perfectly that they did. But the 2010 version has too much computer animation, which makes it look a little bit fake. 

The evolution of technology is allowing the filmmakers to do anything, including making a man go from human to werewolf.