The Incredibles

Image Source

The Incredibles, like most of the other popular animated movies, was made by Disney and Pixar. The movie was released in 2004, and tells the story of a world where the "supers" (superheros) are no longer "in business". As a result of lawsuits, all the "supers" have had to hang up their boots are attempt to lead normal lives. This all changes though when a new super villain, complete with advanced technology and a fiendish plan, shows up on the scene. The story focuses on the lives on 5 members of a superhero family, all with unique powers. The baby, Jack Jack, only plays a relatively minor role in the movie.

Toy Story

Image Source

Toy Story truly is the film that started the craze behind animated films. The film was released in 1995, and is still a massive favourite of children and adults alike. The film is based around the life of Woody, a toy cowboy. In the film, all the toys are alive, and only pretend to be "dead" when people are around. When Andy, Woody's owner, gets a new toy, Buzz Lightyear, Woody feels threatened and jealous. He manages to get both himself and Buzz lost, and then must find a way to get back to Andy before Andy moves house. Over the course of the film, the 2 toys develop a profoundly deep relationship.

Finding Nemo

Image Source

Finding Nemo is one of the most popular animated movies ever released, and with good reason. The movie was released in 2003, and in the movie a young fish named Nemo is captured by scuba divers. Nemo's father, Marlin, then goes searching for Nemo, to save his son. Along the way, he meets Dory, another fish with amnesia. Both Dory and Marlin risk everything to try and save Nemo, while Nemo tries to escape from the fish tank he is stuck in inside a dentist's office. Throughout the movie, both Nemo and Marlin meet a number of very memorable characters, such as Bruce the shark and Crush the turtle.

• Opening Sequence
• Character
• Setting
• Storyline
• Structuring of Time
• Cause and Effect
• Point of View (From Which the Narrative is Presented)
• Closure or Closing Sequence

Production Elements

• Camera and Film:

1. Camera Angle
2. Eye-level
3. High Angle
4. Low Angle
5. Birds Eye
6. Unusual

• Camera Movement:

1. Panning
2. Zooming
3. Tilting
4. Camera Shot
5. Close-up
6. Extreme Close-up
7. Mid Shot
8. Long Shot
9. Extreme Long Shot
10. Point of View / Subjective
11. Reaction Shot

• Lighting:

1. Soft Lighting
2. Hard Lighting
3. High Key lighting
4. Low Key Lighting

• Visual Composition (mise-en-scene)
• Acting
• Editing
• Sound:

1. Diegectic
2. Non-Diegectic
3. Dialogue
4. Music / Score
5. Sound Effects
6. Voice Over

~ Story Elements ~

Opening Sequence

The opening of a film introduces the audience to the world of time and space in which the narrative takes place. Opening sequences provide a platform from which the narrative is launched and are often called ‘set ups’.

During the opening sequence the filmmaker introduces the characters and begins to develop these characters for the audience who is also orientated into both the physical settings and the historical settings.

Character

Character development is the relation to the audience of a character’s personality, beliefs, strengths, weaknesses and emotions. We are normally introduced to the main protagonist at the start of the narrative. From this point onwards, we learn more about who they really are.

Character development can be done through various narrative devices. The simplest is the traditional ‘Once upon a time…’ fairytale format, which we are immediately introduce to the main character and then told their story.

Another technique is to look back on the character’s life or part of it.

Setting

The setting of a fictional film narrative refers to the location and the historical period in which the story takes place.

Location refers to the physical geography of the story.

The setting of a narrative helps to tell the story because the audience already has an understanding of settings and their context within film genres.

In genres such as western, film noir, comedy, romantic comedy, science fiction and fantasy, the audience also understands the codes and conventions that apply to specific genres.

Storyline

Story lines, including

• Central and concurrent story lines and the motivations, conflicts or narrative issues raised in them.
• Ways in which story lines comment upon, contrast or interrelate with other story lines in the text.

Structuring of Time

Film narratives operate within codes and conventions, and as the audience we view them with an understanding of these conventions. The structuring of time within a narrative is an example of these conventions. Film uses convention top help the audiences overcome the limitations of real time. Occasionally, a film narrative presents the story in real time, in other words, screen time and story time are the same.

Audiences accept the convention that films compress time so that the events of a character’s lifetime can occur for us within 2 hours we have set aside to watch the film.

Time can also be manipulated in a film narrative though such devices as time-lapse photography, slow motion, fast motion, flashback and flash forward.

Cause and Effect

Cause and effect is a narrative function. Everything that happens in a story must happen for a reason. There must be a cause for there to be an effect. The cause and effect chain is a foundation of story telling.

Point of View (From Which the Narrative is Presented)

In presenting the narrative, the filmmaker decides from whose point of view the story will be told. In a conventionally plotted narrative, the point of view that one or two main protagonists. Point of view does not need to be limited to only one character.

Point of View in which the narrative is presented, including

• Character, or other viewpoint
• Story information given or withheld at different points of the narrative

Closure or Closing Sequence

The closing sequence brings the plot of climax both in a story and emotional sense; it is the point at where the audience reaches an understanding about unanswered questions relating to the story and characters.

~ Production Elements ~

Camera/Film:

Camera is the most obvious of the production elements. Camera techniques develop the plot, narrative possibilities and characters. The camera angle affects how viewers will perceive that subject. Angles can establish relationships, create moods and develop story lines. Camera movement can also be used to create emotion or draw the audience’s attention to a subject. Camera shots are used in context to a situation in the film.

There are 5 basic camera angles:

• Eye-level
• High Angle
• Low Angle
• Birds Eye
• Unusual

There are 3 basic camera movements:

• Panning
• Zooming
• Tilting

There are 7 basic camera shots:

• Close-up
• Extreme Close-up
• Medium Shot
• Long Shot
• Extreme Long Shot
• Point of View or Subjective
• Reaction Shot

Additionally the film format will affect the mood and look of a film. Some format options available are black and white, colour film, digital video and animation.

Lighting:

Lighting allows objects and characters to be seen by the audience. This can be the most creative elements of film making. It can also help with character development. Characters can be made to look friendly or evil through the use of lighting. The background of a shot is lit up to create a broad depth of field. Additionally lighting can describe a relationship or set a mood.

Lighting can be described in four categories: Soft, Hard, High-key and Low-key.

• Soft Lighting: wraps around an object, casting shadows with soft edges. This creates a soft, warm feeling.
• Hard Lighting: Consists of bright whites and dark blacks and creates harder edged shadows. This creates a cruel, cold feeling.
• High-key Lighting: Creates little shadow. Set tends to be flooded with light. This is often used to create a normal “Happy” scene. The use of strong key lights mean that only parts of the set are lit other parts remain in shadow. This can create a very dramatic effect with only some object being high-lighted.
• Low-key Lighting: If key lights are set at a Low point very strong shadows are thrown on surfaces. This can create an eerie effect.

Lighting also helps convey the point of view of a character.

Visual Composition (Mise – en – Scene):

Visual composition refers to everything within the frame. It determines how the shot develops the characters and storyline. It can also incite responses and emotions within the audience.

Questions that need to be considered for visual composition are:

• How will the shot be lit?
• How will the shot be arranged?
• Where will the actors be placed?
• What props will be placed in the shot?

In the movie Psycho, Alfred Hitchcock left nothing to chance with the visual composition of his movie. Three examples of this are:

Acting:

This refers to the work of an actor or actress who tells the story by portraying a character. Through the use of body language, tone of voice, posture and delivery of lines develops the character and creates a relationship between the character and audience. In some cases the qualities of the character are due to the reputation of the character.

Editing:

Editing is the process of placing images and sound in an order to tell a story and create emotion. Editing is the process of looking at the footage shot and selecting the most appropriate shots which then are assembled in a sequence that conveys a narrative to the audience. It can establish setting, develop character, restructure time and express point of view.

Editing serves three major purposes:

• Narrative: allows the audience to follow the character throughout the narrative and can also express a character’s thoughts.
• Emotional: the way in which a film is cut can produce an emotional response from the audience.
• Intellectual Editing: the director is able to plant a thought or concept in the audience’s mind.

Additionally editors often combine visual images and sounds to develop narratives.

Sound:

Sound can be divided into two categories:

• Diegetic
• Non – Diegetic

Diegetic sound is where the narrator tells the story. The narrator presents the actions and thoughts of the character. Also the sound of glass breaking as a character smashes a mirror is referred to as diegetic sound.

Non – Diegetic sound comes from the outside world of the story. This can include the sound of a characters heart beat as a character runs or music playing in the background of a scene.

Other types of sound include:

• Dialogue
• Music/Score
• Sound-effects
• Voice over

High School Musical tells the story of an idealized dream high school. This tells you the story of all three parts of the musical. Because all characters are clichés, the stories are as well. You name it you get it. No surprises, but then no bad surprise either. It's definitely a pretty little filmlet with pretty stars that sing prettily pretty little songs. That's it. It all reminded me of the 1970s touring show Up With People, nice songs, nice people, nice show, otherwise utterly not memorable. Even the style of the song material was the same in the show as it is now in the musical.

But then, what can you expect from a film called High School Musical which, like its two prequels, tells the story of a high school musical that should be performed? But now comes the turn-around you didn't expect. I've seen all three of them and I liked them.

The films are utterly enjoyable, because you need absolutely no brains to follow. You even might walk out for 30 minutes and come back and won't be lost in the story, the plot is so predictable. The music doesn't offend or excite, you may read a book with it and never even notice it is playing. The acting is just good enough for high school, so nothing to complain there either. It's a pure Disney product in a fantasy world high school. But time and again I was reminded of my own high school. So all in all, it's good value for the money. Just don't expect any depth in story or acting.

The newest Disney product has been selling millions of DVDs and CDs in the United States and millions more worldwide. No wonder it went movie, the merchandizing potential is enormous. It is just surprising that such nondescript music is selling like that. But probably it's also because of Zac Efron who has become the load stone of many crushes.

Zac Efron and his girl friend and co-star Vanessa Hudgens have presented themselves as very likeable and clean young actors in London; as Britney Spears did when she was employed by Disney. They both seem to be mother-in-law's dream matches and as squeaky clean as the movie they just played in. It is to be hoped they remain that way.

Being such inoffensive persons, it beats the imagination why they were attacked during a night out in London. It is quite unutterable, what spite can do to a person. Another unsavoury side link were topless photographs of Zac showering offered on eBay by a user zerimarr. That's just plainly tasteless, and probably Photoshop; and eBay took ages to clean these bids out, as usual. It is time that people started to respect the right to private life again, even if somebody is a star. The film is a good start to instruct your children about that as well.

After breaking up with his girlfriend, Zia (Patrick Fugit) made the choice to end his life by cutting his wrist, but, surprisingly enough, the afterlife he goes to is pretty much the same, only worse. It's an afterlife for people who commit suicide, that's right, everyone in this dismal land ended up here after taking their own life. Safe to say, this is a world without a smile.

Zia, after finding out his ex-girlfriend (Leslie Bibb) had killed herself, and also ended up in this world decides to hit the road and look for her. Along side him, his friend Eugene (Shea Whigham) and a hitchhiker they pick up along the way (Shannyn Sossamon), they set out to find her. Zia, along the way, discovering, his ex-girlfriend, might not be what he was looking for all along.

Directed by Goran Dukic, this film really isn't a happy go lucky flick, but, it was very interesting to say the least. This Dark Comedy, based off the short story "Kneller's Happy Camper's" keeps you tied to the screen the entire film. All in all, it was very original, and very enjoyable. "An Offbeat Comedy, A Love Story, A Road Movie - But Everybody's Dead", the tag line to the movie says it all I think.

Titled "Wild Strawberries" it continues, to this day, to be an example of film as art, a piece of enduring substance and importance.

It is the story of an aged Swedish doctor/professor (Isak Borg) who travels from Stockholm to Lund University to receive an honorary degree for his lifetime achievements. On this journey, which he chooses to take by car, he reflects on his life, and the relationships with others that filled it - relationships that he used and misused for reasons he is trying now to understand.

This film deals with the larger issues of life in the post-war generation of the 1950's: Love, lost love, alienation, emotional impotence, man's purpose and his dealings with others; or in some cases his lack of dealing with others as he should.

Isak Borg recalls days of bliss when, on his way to Lund, he stops at the location of the old Borg summer house where he used to spend time in his youth. Here he is overwhelmed by the beautiful memories of time spent in this tranquil, lush landscape; time spent with family, many who are now gone. Here, he looks upon the wild strawberry patch of his youth- its vibrancy and freshness: symbols of a simpler, richer, more energetic time in his life.

Through dreams, meditations, and conversations with his daughter-in-law Marianne, who accompanies him on the ride to the university, Isak is forced to confront the indifference he has shown to others throughout his life; he is forced to contemplate his life and what its purpose was, and still is, and by extension he is forced to contemplate life: the bigger picture.

One sequence, revealing a dream Isak has, can only be described as artistically eerie. Here he is in a seemingly deserted town in all its whitewashed blandness, where the town clock has no hands, as if time doesn't exist, and the only sign of life he sees is a horse-drawn cart -rider less- pulling a wagon with a casket on it…what this casket reveals, after it has fallen off of the wagon and opened up cannot be given away here, but it certainly sets the tone for the rest of Isak's musings on his journey.

The film is, as they say, "poetry in motion," with gorgeous cinematography by Gunnar Fischer. The flashbacks are seamless and fluid, with scenes of the past and present moving back and forth with ease, as if riding between gentle waves on a lake.

This film is an experience which begs to be experienced again and again from time to time. This is no transitory entertainment to be watched once and tossed away like a fast-food wrapper. This is a film which reveals more of itself upon repeated viewings and the more it reveals the more satisfied and enlightened the viewer becomes.

What can I say of the ending to this visual and aural sculpture? It is probably the most beautiful, poignant, and understated ending in all of cinema. A perfect ending to Isak Borg's life progression; a testament to Ingmar Bergman's cinematic vision and storytelling genius.

A simple fact which is shown over and over is that when it comes to Hollywood only the good guys win and, since we; the audience buy into most of what we see showing on screen, those good guys end up being Americans. People within the industry almost never let the facts of history get in the way of a box-office blockbuster. They really do not discuss this simply because it is not what the majority of filmmakers do. We all see the movies and look at the American soldiers doing what is ‘moral’ and ‘right’ even when they do evil, they always end up doing something that creates absolution. Not to say that many films do not address the fairy tale ideas in the films, but such films are almost never readily accepted with the viewers. They still look for their heroes and our villains. And the Hollywood studios continue to win everything alone. Remember Steven Spielberg's D-Day spectacular Saving Private Ryan? Someone; namely the screenwriters simply forgot that 72,000 British and Canadian troops were also involved in that victory.

What the films show are stories that attract the viewers and show them some of the things that happen, but end up with a story with a lovely fairy tale ending. Audiences never see war as something as acceptable facts such as; accepting the fact that people are going to send their sons and daughters to die. No way, the majority of filmmakers never let the absurdities of history get in the way of a box-office blockbuster.

In the majority of major motion pictures, the heroes that are seen are more than other times, larger than life characters and follow a fixed formula most times. Tom Pollard spoke of this formula in his piece “The Hollywood War Machine,” where he describes the heroes as:

1. A group of professionals with a life and death mission.
2. Comprised of different personality types essential to success.
3. Are cool, stoic and yet exhibit courage and a sense of morality.

With the likes of a formula such as this, there is no such thing as a true war story.

As O’Brien said in his article, How to tell a true war story, he mentions the facts, “In many cases a true war story cannot be believed. If you believe it, be skeptical. It is a question of credibility. Often the crazy stuff is true and the normal stuff isn’t, because the normal stuff isn’t necessary to make you believe the truly incredible craziness. In other cases you can’t even tell a true war story. Sometimes it’s just beyond telling.”

With O’Brien showing you that the truth is something which is not depicted and Pollard giving a formula, one can easily see that there is not such thing as a true war story, there is only the story that a scriptwriter and a filmmaker decides to show us.

In O’Brien’s article “The Things They Carried” he mentions about war. “War is hell, but that’s not the half of it, because war is also mystery and terror and adventure and courage and discovery and holiness and pity and despair and longing and love. War is nasty; war is fun. War is thrilling; war is drudgery. War makes you a man; war makes you dead.” That is a summation of what war is and what it can be based on binary oppositions. Of the many people who try to create a true war story, none ever got it right. Many came close just not right.

One of the closest depictions of the human element in a true war film would happen to be ‘The Thin Red Line.’ This film does not possess a clear beginning, middle or end and the progression is a fairly loose one. The story revolves on the characters and their voice over showing what is happening to each one as the story goes. We only see some soldiers in conversation about the brutality of war and while others stroll aimlessly trying to sort out their emotions. Quite contrary to most of the war films made and in specific about WW2, The Thin red Line doesn’t hold back to show human suffering and death from what it really is. The direct combat with the enemy combined with obstacles and moments of success have always been the indispensable elements of a combat film. Moreover, it is also very common to see American soldiers burning down villages, collecting ‘war souvenirs’, like the teeth of the Japanese soldiers or carrying photos of their wives or loved ones and even playing cards in their free time.

The Thin Red Line is about the Guadalcanal battle in the Pacific Ocean during the Second World War, but there is absolutely no attempt to create neither a historical account of this war nor a precise and accurate depiction of the past events. The film is concerned with War or just war as a universal phenomenon. As a result, there is no reference to the historical context or to the historical interests at stake and in this sense World War II merely stands for an archetype of War. The issues of race, nationality, ideology and strategy are purposefully de-emphasized, in order to explore the roots of such conflict in a more abstract level.

A lot of World War II combat films portrayed the hardships and the ugliness of warfare, but the war per se was never questioned. The soldiers had faith in the war and platitudes about protecting freedom or saving democracy were often used to explain the American involvement. On the other hand, the soldiers in the Thin Red Line are presented as pawns of the army that are easily consumable and replaceable. Contrary to most World War II Combat films, there are no moments of glory and triumph nor there is any pride in the military service.

There is also a matter of identity in this film. “Despite the superficial use of some clichés, such as calling them “the Japs”, or showing the mutilated bodies of the American soldiers as sign of their violent nature, the film does not really distinguish the American soldiers from their opponents. They are all victims of the war and their sufferings are equally unjustified. When a group of Japanese is captured, the close-ups on their faces reveal the fear, the panic and the pain that any human being would experience.” (The Thin Red Line and the World War II Hollywood Tradition by Eleftheria Thanouli,)

World War II films painted a portrait of victory and competence, of American true grit overpowering storm trooper discipline and samurai fanaticism. Vietnam erased that image. The disrepute of the thousand-day war transformed military action into a code phrase for legalized atrocities and made the soldier the butt of comedy, condescension and contempt. The increasing number of films about the past are no longer historical; they are images, simulacra, and pastiches of the past. They are effectively a way of satisfying a craving for historicity, using a product that substitutes for and blocks it. Yet for all the cinematic qualities, and the power of the film, who is to say if it is a real war story?

One of the best war films ever made would have to be Platoon by Director Oliver Stone which was based on his experiences in Vietnam. This is probably the closest anyone would come to making a true war film or story since there are no morals, no villains, no good or evil, just man as the summation and decision maker of what happens.

There are no defined battle lines and the combat scenes lead you to believe that the enemy is everywhere. The line between good and evil is blurred and often times non-existent in this film. Two of the characters of the film; Sergeant Elias is portrayed as a caring, intelligent leader who escapes reality through the use of drugs. His nemesis, Sergeant Barnes, is portrayed as an efficient fighting machine who will stop at nothing to get the job done. You soon realize that he, too, is just doing everything to ensure his own survival. This in itself shows you that besides a what going on against an enemy, there is also another war going on between different groups and who is to say who the real enemy is. Throughout the film you get the idea that there is a belief among the troops that if you're going to get killed in Vietnam, it's better that you get killed early in your tour. That way you don't suffer so much. Because of the lack of suffering, a newly arrived soldier's life isn't worth as much as the people who are "short".

Some may say that the character development in the story is weak and there is no plot. Simply put, this adds to the story and makes it different from others which glorify war and have heroes fighting the good fight. There are no real heroes in this movie and no real villains. There is just a group of frightened men fighting for survival in their own ways and counting the days until they can leave the country. And Platoon is a film which happens to show that.

Another wonderful war movie is Apocalypse Now and this was done showing the blurred lines between what is right, good and what is expected of soldiers. It is another example of as close as a person can come to a real war story.

The movie opens with Willard stuck in a hotel room in Saigon, waiting and wishing for a mission. As he narrates the film, he says, "and for my sins they gave me one." He is assigned by General Corman a mission in which he is to track down a renegade colonel deep in the jungle and ‘terminate his command’ . The colonel has a sanctuary in Cambodia where he has an army of Montagnard tribesmen who both worship and despise him. Then you view more characters as the story goes one, one of whom is Colonel Kilgore who seems oblivious to war and seems to look at it as just another job. He only agrees to get the boat into the river after he discovers that the water at the mouth of the river is excellent for surfing.

Willard and a boat crew start up the river and from them you can see Willard's mood change the farther they go, he becomes more distant and brooding. He realizes that Kurtz has discovered the madness and futility of war just like what he, too, is discovering. Besides the end of the film where he exclaims “The Horror. The Horror,” The movie ends with Willard throwing down his machete and then the Montagnard tribesmen throw down their weapons more or less symbolism for the end of war. This is probably one of the best war movies ever made. It shows the absurdity and futility of war and, as Kurtz discovered, what it takes to win a war, yet it elements of true war film but is not a true war story because of the morals, symbolism and definitions of what is good and evil.

The difference between these movies and what can be constructed as a true war story is that there definitions of what can be done in a movie and whereas in a war, there are so definitions. All in all, there can be stories and films which come close to telling a true war story, but there can never be one. O’Brien said it best;

“A true war story is never moral. It does not instruct, nor encourage virtue, nor suggest models of proper human behavior, nor restrain men from doing the things men have always done. If a story seems moral, do not believe it. If at the end of a war story you feel uplifted, or if you feel that some small bit of rectitude has been salvaged from the larger waste, then you have been made the victim of a very old and terrible lie. There is no rectitude whatsoever. There is no virtue. As a rule of thumb, therefore, you can tell a true war story by its absolute and uncompromising allegiance to obscenity and evil.”

When one takes into account what a true war story is, it can be understood why it is never made and why people choose the fantasy over the facts. They seek the release and they look at something that would make them feel good and uplifted, not depressed and hopeless. There never was a true war story made in Hollywood and as long as there is a craving for entertainment and fictional stories, the factual ones will never be told.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. “Platoon”
2. “Apocalypse Now”
3. “Operation Hollywood, Hollywood’s Dirty Little Secret.
4. “The Thin Red Line and the World War II, Hollywood Tradition by Eleftheria Thanouli.
5. ‘The Hollywood war Machine’ by Tom Pollard
6. ‘How to Tell a True war Story’ by Tim O’Brien