Unit 2.1 Advanced and Experimental 3D Computer Animation Techniques – Project 2, week 2.
Premise Project Design
Themes
- On and off screen interaction.
- Building up a presence and then taking it away.
- Suggestive information and building a conclusion.
Project Outline
For my final major project I wish to explore the themes above, how I can manipulate the narrative in various ways, create a presence, take it away and leave the audience asking questions. My research on Lev Kuleshov (read further for more) is implemented in understanding a technique to create meaning through imagery. I wish to do the same experiment of the effect with audio, dialogue and sound effects. This will also include the various ways that I wish to build a presence other than using sound.
Story
The story that I have in mind involves a subject, the on-screen protagonist going about their day and coming into contact with an off-screen subject. The subjects interacts together in various ways and influence each other, however the off-screen subject is never seen. By doing this, I can manipulate the audience’s perspective through suggestive psychology that the presence is actually there. Once I reveal the absence of the presence at the end of the animation, there are questions posed. For example: what the presence there to begin with? Was it simply the imagination of the on-screen protagonist? Is the state of their psychology questionable? Did they imagine the presence like a mirage in a desert. Does the imagined presence describe the protagonists desires or needs?
To what end– Manipulate the audiences perspective through building a presence off-screen, then taking it away. Make them ask questions about what they use saw and what it means considering the character.
How to Build a Presence:
- Audio off-screen (I mention this separately since its is a main one).
- Impression/performance that the protagonist gives.
- Interaction with something off-screen, through the protagonist or not.
- Mise-en-scene and staging.
Types of On and Off-Screen Interaction:
- Physical – body to body or object to body.
- Audio – responsive or unresponsive with character (which interacts with what?) Does the presence even exist if they do not interact?
- Psychological.
- Emotional.
- Visual – Can be seen on-screen.
- Eyeline.
(Going deeper):
- Temperature – could be used in the case of super hero characters.
- Change in air/atmosphere.
Context/ Film Related Research- Types of interaction
Audio interaction
The next information comes from an online video film analysis audio-visual study (Telling Story With Off-Screen Sound, 2016). This source has helped me to understand the initial concept, where I should begin to analyse and understand the forms of cinematic design in this subject.
“Since visuals are predominant in film, sound is often forgotten about. A subsidiary to visuals as it is more of a complemental element rather than a focal point of a narrative. We can overlook how much they (films) communicate through sound. Sound is great at building, extending, and transforming what’s on screen. Sound shapes what you see, and what you think you see. In other words, things do not actually have to be on screen to be part of the story. This is what we call off-screen sound. It provides information and helps build the world outside the frame. So, what exactly is an off-screen sound? It’s a sound that the characters in the movie can hear but we the audience are not directly shown. These sounds do not exist in the on set and are purposefully added in post to make the world feel real.”
How can the off-screen sound be used?
World Building:
- Where the story takes place
- What the place is like
- What exists within it.
“Characters react to off-screen audio all of the time, provoking a response. Using the characters to action. When the characters act and react, the story moves forward. That means that off-screen sound can often be the main instigator for story progression. For example whether the character is hunting someone, or being hunted by something else. So, while the offscreen sound are moving the story forward, they are also telling up how to feel. Horror films are full of monsters that go unseen creating tension and fear. Off-screen sound can also be funny, they can be used as a punch line. They can also affect a scene in a nuanced way.”
Film references:
- Das Boot (1981). Director Wolfgang Petersen.
- The Third Man (1949). Director Carol Reed.
- Delicatessen (1991). Directors Marc Caro and Jean-Pierre Jeunet.
- The Goonies (1985). Director Richard Donner.
- Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back (1980). Director Irvin Kershner.
- Office Space (1999). Director Mike Judge. (dialogue interaction)
- The Haunting (1963). Director Robert Wise.
- Pulp Fiction (1994). Quentin Tarantino.
- The Lord of the Rings: The fellowship of the Ring (2001). Director Peter Jackson.
- The Shawshank Redemption (1994). Director Frank Darabont.
- Stand By me (1986). Director Rob Reiner. (Wolf sounds).
- Big (1988)/ Director Penny Marshall. GOOD REF (Hotel room)
- An American Werewolf in London (1981). Director John Landis.
- Signs (2002). Director M.night Shayamalan.
Analysis of the Film ‘Delicatessen‘, 1991 (Delicatessen, 1991)
The film Delicatessen (Delicatessen, 1991), directed by Jean-Pierre Jeunet, uses off-screen sound to build information about unseen surroundings with SFX.
In the shot above, the actor is hiding in a trash can, while the bin collectors are coming. The shot cuts to inside the shaking container with an extreme close-up. The actor then dies at the hands of the butcher that opens the trash can. Pholey sound is implemented to shape what the audience can interpret of the surroundings from the perspective of the actor inside of the trash can.
The off-screen sound in this scene is used to build what the audience cannot see of the world outside of the character that the camera is following. While the sound is not clear, this is also intentional in order to lead the audience to guess, with provided information, about what will happen next. Is he safe or not? What will happen next? All of this creates the intended feeling of tension and anticipation in this thriller montage sequence.
In terms of my research, this relates since the film producers build an unseen, off-screen presence, or interaction with unknown surroundings, which the protagonist is immersed in. The information given about the environment through the sound design does not necessarily have to be real, what is important is what effect they have. In this case, the sound is not fully identifiable, nor does it need to be. However, the film producers use the sound effects to produce an interpretable image in the audiences mind that creates the intended mood. That is all they need to do in this case.
The full scene can see viewed here:
Analysis of the film ‘her‘
In this film (her, 2013), the protagonist is an introverted writer that falls in love with his operating system. The type of on/off-screen interaction I will be analysing is dialogue, psychological and emotional. This is significantly different from simply off-screen sound effects, as analysed with the film Delicatessen.
They develop a complex relationship where the A.I. ‘Samantha’ is tailored to the protagonist personally, to help with their interaction and better his experience with the product (product: A.I.). Their relationship evolves from operating system to conversational partner, secretary, lover and then sexual partner. However, the relationship was doomed to fail since what has been created is an artificial interaction with an uncertain reality.
The narrative design builds complex illusions through dialogue interaction, as well as action/reaction from these interactions. I could go into a deeper deliberation about illusion of consciousness and simulated relationships, but the research references I looked at are listed below that better describe it.
The second reference (Pappas, 2021). The way he interacts with Samantha is like talking to a normal person, although awkward at first, it becomes much more natural and believable. Furthermore, the protagonist becomes more invested their relationship and conversations emotional and psychologically.
Examples of Conversations:
The beginning of the film:
Here, the audience and the protagonist is conscious of the fact that their conversation will be planned out, to a degree. You know that the A.I’s dialogue will be programmed towards methodical structure to learn about the operating system user.
Way it is staged. At first he speaks to an operating system to describe how the operating system should have customised function. Within these shots he is answering methodical questions, while talking a mechanical sounding voice from the computer screen. This setting and staging point towards a non-human conversation in a work orientated environment (his desk). In comparison, when he first talks to Samantha, the mise-en-scene setting points more towards a normal human interaction. He sit in his living room, a place for conversation. Where human interaction natural takes place. The protagonist is placed in the far right third of the frame and positioned as though conversing with someone. While he doesn’t directly hold an eye line, the body language makes enough implications. The conversation begins with very natural performance tone, with awkward polite greetings. The mise-en-scene contrast between these two shots will send automatic indications that the audience’s instinctive psychologically.
Kuleshov Effect
Lev Kuleshov. Soviet filmmaker in the early 20th century. But more of a theoretician. The Koleshov Effect The roots of modern film theory largely originated in France in the 1910’s.
The act of intercutting multiple shots together to create a connection. Whether that connection is providing context between them or misleading the audience, It provides information for the audience to interpret.
Lev Kuleshov made a demonstration of this effect which involved an actor staring into the camera with a neutral expression. Then, there were intercut shots that changed each time, and cut back to the the actor. Kuleshov theorised that, from the perspective of the audience, the actor’s emotional facial expression would change according to the juxtaposed intercut shots. Even though the actor’s face remained the same. For example:
https://academic.oup.com/scan/article/1/2/95/2362814?login=true
Hitchcock – The Kuleshov Effect
Hitchcock expands on Lev Kuleshov’s idea, by inferring that through intercut shots, a connection can be conveyed that leads the audience to suggest/ believe in the character’s particular thought process. The actor will give a reaction to the intercut shot, and depending on what the middle shot was, the actor’s reaction can produce a different interpretation through the use of specific context. For example:
You have two kinds of what you might call it cutting, it isn’t exactly that. Cutting implies severing something. It really should be called assembly. Mosaic is assembling something to create a whole. Montage means the assembly of pieces of film, which moved in rapid succession before the eye [that] create an idea.
– Alfred Hitchcock (Burrows, 2021).
Kuleshov Effect 2 – YouTube (Christensen, 2020).
The Kuleshov Effect – YouTube (Folding Ideas, 2017).
Analysis of the Film ‘Shame‘, 2011 – Subway Attraction scene
I will use the film Shame as a cinematic example of Hitchock’s expanded demonstration of the Kuleshov effect.
Shot Analysis:
Connections can be made within the shots above (fig 11) by the audience due to eyeliner, staging placement of the characters, and types of intercut shots. From shots 1-2, the character’s are looking at each other flirtatiously. It begins with the male protagonist getting the attention of the female. In shots 3-4, the male looks lower, still in the direction of the woman. Shot 4 draws context from shot 3, showing that he was looking at her legs, conveying lustful thoughts. Then in shot 5, the female looks seductively at the male protagonist, as if giving an agreeable response. Shot 6, the male responds further.
The analysis above is simply speculation from myself as a subjective viewer, attempting an objective perspective from the audience. However, everyone’s views are subjective from their own perspectives. Also, there is no explicit explanation as to what the audience should believe the characters are thinking. The information provided influences how the audience is able to draw connections to produce the designed results through the design of camera, editing, mise-en-scene, and performance.
In terms of the staging design (see fig 10), each subject stays to one side of the screen when the camera faces them. They are placed further from the side that they are looking at and their eye lines face the opposite directions, as though they are looking at each other. There is no interaction between them until they physically draw closer, and yet the input shots conclude through information and context that they are interacting with each other.
Project Notes – Talk with Tutor
J-cuts and L cuts- playing with audio and the concept in terms of timing and reaction.
Look into Lev Kuloshov- Juxtaposition of images. Editing two things add up to a meaning. – try his experiment but with audio. Meaningless words but different tone. intention and meaning- ambiguity.
Can try using the same dialogue lines with different tone and performance reaction. Or the different dialogue with the same reaction that the audience may interpret differently. Action/ reaction. Suggestive performance without actual acting.
Abstract- audio visual comparison. what does it add up to? Do they react/ affect of the reaction? Is there a reaction from the off-screen presence.
References
Burrows, K., 2021. Hitchcock on Editing and the Kuleshov Effect. Available at: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DjSr7QMppi4> [Accessed 3 May 2022].
Christensen, S., 2020. Kuleshov Effect 2. Available at: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxjnTFlXkEs> [Accessed 14 April 2022].
Delicatessen. 1991. [film] Directed by M. Caro and J. Jeunet. France: UGC Distribution.
Her. 2013. [film] Directed by S. Jonze. United States: Warner Bros. Pictures.
FilmComicsExplained, 2020. The Philosophy of her Explored. [image] Available at: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGcBNACe80M> [Accessed 2 May 2022].
FilmDaft. n.d. The Kuleshov Effect Explained. An Illustrated Guide 2022. [online] Available at: <https://filmdaft.com/the-kuleshov-effect-explained-an-illustrated-guide/> [Accessed 3 May 2022].
Folding Ideas, 2017. The Kuleshov Effect. Available at: <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy2Vhnqtu8I> [Accessed 14 April 2022].
Lynch, D., 2021. What Is the Kuleshov Effect? Learn the Importance of Video Editing. [online] MasterClass. Available at: <https://www.masterclass.com/articles/what-is-the-kuleshov-effect-learn-the-importance-of-video-editing> [Accessed 3 May 2022].
Mobbs, D., Weiskopf, N., Lau, H., Featherstone, E., Dolan, R. and Frith, C., 2006. The Kuleshov Effect: the influence of contextual framing on emotional attributions. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, [online] 1(2), pp.95-100. Available at: <https://academic.oup.com/scan/article/1/2/95/2362814?login=true> [Accessed 8 March 2022].
Pappas, N., 2021. Spike Jonze’s Her: Love and the Science Fiction Film. Journal of Comparative Literature and Aesthetics, [online] 44(3), pp.7-9, 12-14. Available at: <http://jcla.in/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/JCLA-Vol.-44-No.-3-2021_Nickolas-Pappas.pdf> [Accessed 2 May 2022].
Shame. 2011. [film] Directed by S. McQueen. United Kingdom: Momentum Pictures.
Telling Story With Off-Screen Sound. 2016. Directed by K. Senzaki. RocketJump Film School.