starnz.blogg.se

• Expressive coherence examples in film how to#

In his analyses, Morgan finds that “camera movements make evident a necessary stickiness to film worlds that shows us to be responsible for our reactions to them.” It is this very stickiness, and the possibility that camera movements mediate off-screen space in ways that operate beyond the confines of spatial continuity and narratively significant information, with which this article is concerned.

Morgan’s book, which begins from the position that camera movement “remains a topic in search of a debate,” takes great leaps towards ensuring that this is no longer the case, in the process prompting us to consider the more complex and nuanced ways in which audiences relate to what they see on screen. We have been so struck by the intuitive force that the moving camera is about point of view, that the camera functions as our eye, that we have been unable to see anything else.”

Expressive coherence examples in film how to#

“I think we have never gotten a handle on the terms of camera movement, never figured out how to create a working model for thinking about the kinds of things it does and can do. David Bordwell, for instance, has described the “considerable role” that off-screen space plays in camera movement, yet the scope of this role – in his cognitivist framework, at least – is largely limited to the viewer’s perceptual activity and their hypothesizing that “certain offscreen areas will become narratively significant.” The emphasis on perception in this understanding is emblematic of what Daniel Morgan has identified as the “one core assumption” prevalent in existing thinking about camera movement: that the camera functions as a stand-in for the audience’s perception, an assumption he makes the task of his recent book to push back against. While this has hardly gone unnoticed by scholarship in film studies, discussions of this relationship as it pertains to narrative film have predominantly focused on issues of spatial organization and narrative information. In other words, camera movement is intrinsically related to off-screen space. Something is present and perceptible at one moment, and then the camera moves in a way that renders that something off-screen and out of the frame. This is a fact of film form rather than an argument about the intention, significance, or expressive capacity of camera movement. When a camera moves, it constantly changes the status of the objects within the frame – things, spaces, characters – from on-screen to off-screen. There are no wings to the screen” – André Bazin “When a character moves off the screen, we accept the fact that he is out of sight, but continues to exist in his own capacity at some other place in the décor which is hidden from us.