Mise-en-scene: How meaning is made on the screen
Philosophy and film do not mix. This is the impression one has when one sounds out the literature in both fields. Therefore it is with some surprise that one reads that Ludwig Wittgenstein, the renowned Austrian philosopher, was an avid viewer of cowboy movies (Carver, 1995). However, even Wittgenstein did not say anything substantial about the relationship between film and meaning, a relationship which is critical to the understanding not only of film but also of meaning constitution itself and its relevant theories (Ruthrof, 2002).To make light of meaning on screen, this essay shall consider how screen mediated meaning is achieved through 'mise-en scene' on film and/or television.'Mise-en-scene' is sometimes used as a straight-forward descriptive term but it is actually a concept, which is complicated, yet central to a developed understanding of film. This term is used in film studies in the discussion of visual style (Gibbs, 2002). It is historically to do with directing plays and later became to do with film to express how the material in the frame is directed (imperica.com, 2002). To put it simply, it means staging an action. It refers to the decor, props, costumes
In Red (1999) by Krzysztof Kieslowski, a piece of visual design that reveals meaning is the use of lighting. But not only as a good form of communication, but also as a corrupt form. In Westerns, the good guys wore white while the bad wore black (Mogel, 2000). Earlier in the movie, the two main male characters both saw the bubble gum advertisement from their cars. , staging, location, lighting, camera movement, the actors, and so on (which shall later be discussed in detail). If the audience has not noticed the similarity before, the correspondence of colour of dress and hairstyle is prominently evident. The logic to it is, when a filmmaker has a meaning to his/her movie, the details should be used to express that meaning through symbolism or psychological association. An extreme level-headedness is suggested by his keeping his head still and moving only his eyes (Gibbs, 2002). ConclusionExamining the different aspects of 'mise-en-scene' shows the numerous variables there are at filmmakers' disposal. In the first part of the sequence, Jake watches Mulwray from a hillside above a dry riverbed, while later he observes him from a rocky ledge above the ocean. Later in the film, the three cherries are brought back on screen, now involving a scene with Auguste and his cheating girlfriend. In this way, this shot concedes to Jake's overall dominance of the sequence and the film, as the audience already knows Jake is the subject of this shot, even as Mulwray is ignorant to this fact (McVay, 2002). Discussing the events that happen after the fatal shooting of Plato (Sal Mineo) outside the Planetarium, Wilson pens :"Jim reaches down and zips up the red jacket that he had given Plato a few moments before, and Judy replaces a shoe that had fallen from Plato's foot.
Common topics in this essay:
Ludwig Wittgenstein,
Kieslowski's Red,
Judge Valentine,
Colours Red,
Planetarium Wilson,
Cary Grant,
Mulwray Jake's,
Orsen Welles,
Martin Landau's,
Breath Life,
gibbs 2002,
aug 2002,
colour red,
judge valentine,
lee 1999,
bubble gum advertisement,
gum advertisement,
bubble gum,
mogel 2000,
film meaning,
main characters,
according gibbs 2002,
18 aug 2002,
colour red props,
main male characters,
|
Acceptance Essays
