Did I mention I like quotes from filmmakers?

"We can express our feelings regarding the world around us either by poetic or by descriptive means. I prefer to express myself metaphorically. Let me stress: metaphorically, not symbolically. A symbol contains within itself a definite meaning, certain intellectual formula, while metaphor is an image. An image possessing the same distinguishing features as the world it represents. An image — as opposed to a symbol — is indefinite in meaning. One cannot speak of the infinite world by applying tools that are definite and finite. We can analyse the formula that constitutes a symbol, while metaphor is a being-within-itself, it's a monomial. It falls apart at any attempt of touching it. " 

                                                                                               - Andrei Tarkovsky

Ivan's Childhood and Andrei Tarkovsky

When I discovered the first films of Tarkovsky, it was a miracle. I suddenly found myself before a door to which I had never had the key.a room which I had always wished to penetrate and wherein he felt perfectly at ease. Someone was able to express what I had always wished to say without knowing how. For me Tarkovsky is the greatest filmmaker.  

                                                                                           - Ingmar Bergman

I can’t say that I’m familiar with any Russian films, let alone Russian directors so it’s quite unsurprising that I hadn’t heard of Andrei Tarkovsky. Tarkovsky was a film director, opera director, writer and film theorist – quite well known by many people around the world and considered to be one of the most influential filmmakers of the 20th century. 

He made his first feature film, Ivan’s Childhood in 1962 just two years after he completed film school. Adapted from the story by Vladimir Bogomolov, it is about a 12 year old orphaned boy who is a spy for the Russian army during World War II.  While made in the sixties, Tarkovsky chose to create the film in black and white, saying “in a black and white film there is no feeling of something extraneous going on, [and] the audience can watch the film without being distracted from the action by colour”. He certainly had a unique approach to films and filmmaking, which was only advantageous – Ivan’s Childhood won the Golden Lion at the Venice Film Festival in 1962 as well as the Golden Gate Award for Best Director at the San Francisco International Film Festival. 

It is not a typical war film with heroic soldiers in extensive battle scenes and is a film with very little violence. Instead, it is a film that explores the impact of the war on the people involved in it and the effect that the loss of family has upon people. The narrative is non-linear with frequent flashbacks or dreams that Ivan is experiencing that involve his mother and a happier time. Dreams and memory are recurring motifs throughout the film and throughout Tarkovsky’s other works. Water and reflections are significant motifs in Ivan’s Childhood and the forest setting of the film is quite impressive, resulting in some admirable composition. 

Ivan’s Childhood is a haunting, emotional film and one that I immensely enjoyed. Hopefully I’ll get my hands on a copy of Tarkovsky’s book Sculpting in Time as it sounds like an interesting read and I look forward to watching more of his films. 

Females + the Film Industry

It was probably going to happen eventually and writing about Jane Campion got me thinking about women in the film industry, so here’s my rant about it…

There are many people in the film (and television) industry that I greatly admire, respect and gain inspiration from. I wrote about Tarantino a few weeks ago, as he is one such example, but I find it difficult to think of females who have that same sort of impact upon me. That’s not to say that there aren’t talented filmmakers that are women, because clearly they are but the industry is one that is still very male dominated.

Sofia Coppola and Jane Campion are two of my favourite directors – but that’s only two out of who knows how many. As someone aspiring to become a part of this brilliant industry, it becomes difficult to imagine it really happening when so few women have actually made a name for themselves.

I find it such a relief when a film that is written or directed by a woman is actually a good piece of cinema, as we need to prove that we are more than capable of creating great works of art, because we are. This is why women such as Catherine Hardwicke irritate me so much, because I feel that her lack of talent reflects badly on female filmmakers. Others may disagree, but it’s my blog and that’s my opinion!

All too often, female roles are written by males – how are they going to be a satisfactory exploration if the role hasn’t even come from a female in the first place? There have been some good female roles written by men and Ellen Ripley (played by Sigourney Weaver) from Alien is certainly a great example but I feel that it’s something that doesn’t happen enough.

I think another quote from Jane Campion is suitable to finish with:

“I would love to see more women directors because they represent half of the population – and gave birth to the whole world. Without them writing and being directors, the rest of us are not going to know the whole story.”

(And a picture of Ellen Ripley being awesome)

Jane Campion... the one where I discuss her films

While I have been interested in watching films by writer-director Jane Campion, her only work that I was familiar with was Bright Star. It instantly became one of my favourite films because of its absolute beauty, both in terms of the stylistic and narrative elements.

So I was excited to hear that we would be looking at auteur theory and viewing a selection of works from Jane Campion.  Film form is an art and the director is the artist or auteur (author), whose influence and unique style can be identified throughout their work. The auteur theory began with the French New Wave in the 1950s, claiming that films should reflect the director’s personal vision. 

There are not many globally recognised female directors as the film industry is one that has been male-dominated since it began.  Of course that’s not forgetting the likes of Sofia Coppola and Kathryn Bigelow (first female to win an Oscar for Best Director), who have certainly made their impression in the industry.

Campion was born in New Zealand but her film career began in Sydney (so she is generally considered Australian) and has made a number of short and feature films over her lifetime. Her 1993 film The Piano won the Palme d’Or at Cannes and was nominated for a number of Oscars in 1994, with Campion winning Best Writing, Screenplay and Holly Hunter taking out the Best Actress in a Leading Role. Commercially and critically, The Piano is considered to be her most successful film. 

Set and filmed on location in New Zealand, the film takes place in the 1850s, and tells the story of a mute woman by the name of Ada (Holly Hunter) who is married off to a man by her father and must move to New Zealand to live with him. Ada has not spoken since she was 6 years old, instead communicating through sign language to her daughter and through playing music on her piano. She is an intriguing character, who manages to make quite a lot of noise for someone who doesn’t speak. She is quite restrained and rigid, but when she plays piano she instantly relaxes, her fingers flowing and dancing across the keys. She makes beautiful, quite haunting music that reflects the mood that she is in at the time. The music is thus used as a key plot device - as a narrative element rather than just a stylistic addition to the film. 

The landscape and setting of the film also plays a fairly significant role in the film. Impressive sweeping shots of the forest and sea are included, establishing the type of environment that Ada and her daughter are moving to. This setting gives the film a rich colour palette, with green and blue hues. The environment proves to be a struggle for the characters that try to control it, as opposed to the native kiwis that don’t see it as something needing to be tamed. Water and mud are also elements that cause difficulties for characters and appear repeatedly throughout the film. To get to New Zealand, they must travel across the ocean with all of their possessions, including Ada’s piano. As the piano is too heavy to carry when they first get there, it must be left on the beach until it can be retrieved. Many shots of the piano on the beach and waves crashing against it are interspersed with the rest of the narrative, showing its importance to Ada and the strong bond that she has with it. Underwater shots of the boat crossing the ocean are used at the beginning and end of the film, creating a sense of a circular narrative.

In terms of auteur theory, looking at The Piano and Bright Star, it is possible to see images and elements that Campion has explored and re-used as they are possibly things that intrigue her and which she is drawn to explore. Both films are set in the 19th century, during the colonial period and include strong, unique female characters who stand up for themselves and won’t settle for anything that isn’t what they want. They are quite melodramatic films that explore romantic relationships as well as close family bonds.

A few stylistic elements that I picked up on were the use of flowing white curtains blowing in the breeze (it’s an image that I distinctly remember and love from Bright Star so I noticed immediately when it was used in The Piano), characters sending notes to each other, rhythmic and flowing camera movement and characters viewing the world through something else (through holes, from behind curtains, etc.) showing their separation from the world or other characters. There are probably many more, however I’m just going by memory from Bright Star as it’s been a while since I last watched it. I found both films to be quite naturalistic in terms of their style and lighting in particular and they are both very beautiful yet haunting works.

While Campion cannot be held responsible for the whole film, as a vast array of people are involved in the process of filmmaking, it’s still possible to see her unique touch and I look forward to experiencing more of her films. 

Article of Interest:

http://www.sensesofcinema.com/2002/great-directors/campion/

Jane Campion

"But short films are not inferior, just different. I think the short gives a freedom to film-makers. What's appealing is that you don't have as much responsibility for storytelling and plot. They can be more like a portrait, or a poem. The great thing is that almost everyone ends up doing something creative with them, even those directors who then go on to make quite boring features." - Jane Campion

Realism

Realism is the depiction of subjects as they appear in everyday life, without embellishment and romanticism, revealing the truth and emphasizing the mediocre. Of course the irony is that it’s very difficult to ever capture the absolute truth. Even without embellishment, a picture is still just one representation, revealing one aspect of a subject and not the whole truth. The neo-realist film movement began in Italy in the 1940s, intending to show the reality of how people were actually living in a dramatic context. The conventions of neo-relist films often involved the use of non-trained actors alongside trained actors, giving the films more authenticity.

Visually, neo-relist films are much in the style of documentaries: quite pared back and minimalist. They were mostly filmed on location, using available light, which added to the naturalistic effect. While the neo-realist movement declined in 1952 with a shift in society, its influences can still be seen in modern cinema. Now, more conventional films are adopting the realist visual techniques, using hand-held camera and simpler techniques and settings in order to create a more authentic environment for the characters.

The 2007 short film Jerrycan from Julius Avery is an example of modern cinema adopting the realist techniques. The visual elements of the film are naturalistic - it was filmed on location using minimal lighting to enhance the stark, bleak reality of the setting. Local children who were inexperienced with acting in films were cast in the main roles. This gave the characters a sense of believability, as if they could be from any small Australian country town.

The camera movement was very fluid and unobtrusive. One memorable scene for me was when the boys are riding around town on their bikes, the camera moving along with them, as though it could be from the perspective of another child riding with them. 

I could appreciate this film for it’s merits, and I can understand how it became a success. However, this is not a film that I particularly enjoyed or was incredibly amazed by. I just felt that once the story had been set up I could see where it was headed and I felt as though it was something that I’d seen and experienced before. Despite this it is a good example of the use of neo-realist techniques in contemporary films, creating an authentic representation of characters from a low socio-economic landscape. 

The Red Shoes

Written, produced and directed by Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger, the 1948 film The Red Shoes is about a young ballerina who must chose between love and ballet - between married life and the life of a professional dancer. It stars Moira Shearer as the ballerina Victoria Page and Marius Goring as Julian Craster, the composer for the ballet company whom Victoria falls in love with. 

(I just discovered that Marius Goring was in Doctor Who in 1967, so I’ll have to find and watch those episodes now…)

Conflict and desire are driving forces in narrative and in the film the domineering impresario, Lermontov (Anton Walbrook) tempts Victoria with the promise of becoming a truly great prima ballerina.

The ballet of The Red Shoes is based on the Hans Christian Anderson fable. It tells the story of a young girl who puts on a pair of red ballet shoes, which she then cannot remove and must continue dancing despite how tired she gets, eventually leading to her death.

There are parallels between the ballet and Victoria’s own story. Being in the ballet company is where her passion lies, but it’s like putting on the red shoes – once she is a part of it there is no escape.

This of course alludes to the death of Victoria and she does eventually throw herself off a balcony into an oncoming train, overcome with the pressure of having to choose between the ballet and her husband. Although this was foreshadowed it was still an emotional scene and quite shocking to see.

The way it was cross cut with shots of Craster running towards her from the train station and Lermontov explaining to the audience of the ballet that she would no longer be dancing created a very powerful scene. It was haunting cinema and executed so well.

However the film then shows her after she jumped, alive after all, she asks Craster to remove the red shoes. While symbolic, this scene ruined the whole mood for me and left me feeling disappointed. The scene before it was so full of heightened emotion and had such an impact but that all completely disappeared after learning that she survived.

It is still an excellent piece of cinema and credit must go to cinematographer Jack Cardiff as well as the production designer who created a visually remarkable film. The sequence where Victoria dances the ballet of The Red Shoes really stood out to me in terms of the stylistic elements.

One thing I’m yet to understand is why anyone does ballet - if films such as this prove anything, it’s that no good ever comes of being a professional ballet dancer!