Atonement - ANALYSING CONTINUITY

This is a scene from the film Atonement, I chose this clip because Atonement is one of my favourite films and also because I think this clip has really good continuity. The continuity of a film is very important as it is what makes the audience believe the story, as with good continuity editing the scene appears more plausible and professional.
The first thing I noticed about this clip was that at the beginning up to 0:14 the shots are much longer, taking the audience steadily through the surrounds and opening, setting up the narrative. However as the scene develops and the tension between the two characters grows the shots have far quicker pace and choppier cuts making this part more intense, and bringing the audience into it more.
The first shot is an ELS of the large estate and gardens owned by the family of Cecilia Tallis played by Keira Knightly where Robbie Turner played by James McAvoy works. This ELS works as an establishing shot for the scene, as the audience can clearly see all of the two characters surroundings. This shot shows them both in the garden, and Cecilia walking towards the camera to the fountain in the foreground. It then cuts to a MS of Robbie runs towards the camera, this is good continuity as we can clearly see that he is following Cecelia. The camera then cuts to a LS of the two of them by the fountain showing he has caught up with her.
Then at 0:16 we see a CU of their hands struggling over the vase and break a piece off and we hear a splash. In the next shot the camera is under water, we see a MCU of the broken bit of vase floating down into the pond. This is a motivated cut as although the audience might have been able to guess, the reason for the noise, it is fully revealed in this shot. At 0:21 we see Cecelia shout at Robbie – the camera then cuts quickly to Robbie’s reaction (laughter) then back to Cecelia. This is a cutaway reaction shot as it briefly cuts away from the central focus so the audience can see another person’s reaction, as an indicator to how they should react. As well as this, the speed of the cuttings tells the audience that he was laughing at the same time she was speaking, it shows that the time hasn’t changed or moved on.
At 0:25 Cecilia leans over to her right, and as she is sitting at that side of the fountain we know she is peering into the fountain. Then she looks over her left shoulder and shouts at Robbie, reinforcing his position. To reinforce what we’ve just seen there is an over the shoulder shot at 0:30 allowing us to see Cecilia sitting by the fountain with a broke vase next to her.
At 0:31 there is another example of a motivated cut, or match on action as Robbie shouts “careful” at Cecilia. This holds the audience attentions and adds some suspense as we want to know why she needs to be careful. Then it is revealed with a CU on her feet that she was about to step in broken vase.
At 0:35 seconds we see Cecilia begin to take her top off, then the camera cuts to being behind her so we can see Robbie’s reaction and she is at the same stage of taking her top off. Similarly she begins to undo her skirt when the camera is behind her, but before she pulls it down the camera cuts so we see the front of her. All this is a match on action sequence, as although there is a lot of camera movement Cecelia appears to take her clothes off smoothly and seamlessly making excellent continuity. Additionally the camera movement is to keep the audience interested and it allows us to see both Cecilia’s and Robbie’s reactions to her action.
At 1:02 and 1:11 we see eye line matching shots of Robbie where his eye line clearly suggests he is looking at Cecilia, first down into the pond, then up and she’s standing on the fountain. The meeting eye lines make the story far clearer and more plausible as we as the audience know where Cecilia is and therefore know where we would expect Robbie to be looking. This happens again in one of the final shots at 1:53 as Robbie looks regretfully on at Cecilia as she storms off. Once again the CU brings the audience into the scene, putting them right in the action.
At 1:17 there is an example of the 180˚ rule as Robbie turns left to look away from Cecilia, then the camera position cuts to being behind him and he is looking right, however this is way he should be facing, as he is still looking to his left, this shows great consideration for direction and great continuity.

Breakfast at Tiffany's Analysis

I have chosen this clip from Breakfast at Tiffany’s because it is one of my favourite films and I think it’s a really great scene, with many different types of shots.
It begins with Holly Golightly played by Audrey Hepburn, getting out of a yellow taxi, so immediately we are reminded that the scene takes place in New York City. She begins running down the street in the rain, the camera movement is a backwards track and it’s a MLS, giving us a glimpse of the surroundings whilst keeping the focus on her. We can tell that it is the late 1950’s/early 60’s because of the style of clothing worn and the old fashioned cars parked along the street. At 0:14 it cuts to a high angle ELS this works as an establishing shot as it shows us more of her surroundings including many of the buildings.
At 0:20 there is an Over the Shoulder Shot, the man has his back to us, this enables us to see the scene from his perspective, but without it being a POV shot, and it keeps the attention on her as we can see her face. At 0:23 we see a CU of the man (Fred) for the first time, and then a CU of Holly, these close ups draw us into the scene and make the audience feel more involved in it. Then at 0:35 as Holly walks away there is a slight tilt upwards keeping the focus still on her, and also giving a view of her surrounding (a dingy ally filled with boxes and trash). From 0:45 the camera pans right, following Holly as she shakes the boxes looking for her cat. Then from 1:01 the camera zooms into a CU on Holly, as we can see he pained expression more clearly helping us to empathise with her. The camera following her gives the audience more of a sense they are there, they can relate to her more and although it isn’t a POV shot we are made to feel the same way she does by the camera movement and I think this is very effective in the scene.
At 1:34 the camera tracks diagonally downwards as Holly crouches down to pick up cat, once again I think this is effective as it brings the audience down into the action with them, engaging them more. Additionally when Holly and Fred kiss from 2.16 the camera zooms in making it more intense, and drawing the audience into the moment.
The tracks, pans, zooms and tilts that are used in this scene slow the pace of it down. This keeps the audience focussed, as it implies that it is an important scene, it is not fast paced and choppy like something in the middle or at the climax, the slower pace shows that it is significant to the film.

Casino Royale Trailer

This video is the trailer for ‘Casino Royale’ the latest of the James Bond films. I chose this trailer as it is very fasted paced and exciting, and gives a wide range of shot distances and angles. There are a number of black out shots through out it making it more dramatic and adding to the suspense and tension that builds up.
It begins with a MS to introduce the main character James Bond, played by Daniel Craig. This is also a Low Angle to make him appear powerful and more dominant in the shot. Behind him we can see a modern aeroplane which tells that it is set in the present day, but also has connotations that suggests an adventure, and the black and white effect connotes a flashback, or the past. At 0:20 there is a MS of James. It’s an interviewer shot at a slightly tilted angle giving it an uneasy feel, implying that the man he’s talking to is an enemy. Soon after this the trailer turns to full colour, suggesting that we are now in the present. At 0:32 there is a High Angle LS of an African army camp, establishing the scene, there is a very quick, forward track right, to give the impression we are going into the camp. This is followed by a MCU of what we can assume is the ‘bad guy’ as he is wearing an all black suit and an intimidating look. The MCU allows us close enough to see that his eyes are very red, making him look more evil, yet we can also see by the background that he is in the army camp – arousing questions from the audience about why his is there, and keeping them intrigued.
At 0:43 there is a CU over the shoulder shot at the card game. The director has used this shot so that we can see the reaction of ‘baddie’ Le Chiffre. The use of a close up means that the audience can now see that one of his eyes is brown, while the other is blue, with cuts around it giving him a scarier, more threatening look. At 0:49 the is a LS crab movement in the camera around the casino to once again establish the scene, and as Bond comes into shot it cuts to a MLS of him and pans left to follow his movement. This allows the audience to feel they are there in the casino with him. At 0:51 there is MS over the shoulder shot looking over Le Chiffre’s shoulder at Bond, that then moves into a super fast crane around to the other side of the table so we are looking over Bond’s shoulder at Le Chiffre. This shot is fast pace and exciting with an almost dangerous feel to it, whilst making the audience feel they have seen both sides of the action so therefore know something the characters may not.
At 1:22 there is a CU of Le Chiffre looking out of the window, the curtains either side of him frame his face, drawing us into his menacing expression.
At 1:42 Low angle shot of James swimming through the water towards Vesper is an underwater backwards track. The camera then cuts to a POV shot from Bond’s point of view as it is now a forward track as if going towards Vesper, putting the audience right in the action again. At 2:10 there is an ECU of Le Chiffre’s eyes, this brings the action in very close so we can feel his piercing glare and his red scared eye is quite disturbing.

Horror Shot Analysis

1.) Describe your shot and identify in what ways it could be seen as representing ‘horror’
Our shot is of a young white male. He is in a dark room and is therefore in a lot of shadow, except for one hand held spotlight which illuminates the left side of him, but creating shadows under his eyes and chin which distort him. I believe that this shot could definitely be seen as representing horror. This is because due to the big contrast in light it is very dramatic. The actor has a menacing look upon his face, and the light has distorted him making him seem threatening and disturbing, therefore we can assume he is the villain, creeping around in the shadows, a typical horror plot line. We can faintly see an arch above him signifying that he is in some kind of basement or dark underground lair, and the fact that he is in these surrounding connote a recluse, a murderer or even a monster, as stereotypically the basement is where the “monster” lives in a house, so this greatly enhances the horror feel of the shot.

2.) What did you actually do to achieve this affect?
To achieve this affect we went down into the school basement where it was pitch black therefore the only form of light was the hand held one. We didn’t put any filter on the light making the contrast of the light greater, therefore the affect more intense. The actor is standing under the arch of the basement to create a frame within a frame. Additionally we asked the actor to stand in a threatening pose with an intimidating expression on his face, to make him appear more frightening making the horror theme more obvious. We did not put the flash on as it would have made the shot far too bright and harsh and it would have ruined the dark mysterious style of the shot. We took a MLS so that you can see that he is in a completely dark room, completely alone.

3.) What do you think is successful about your shot?
I think our shot is very successful because the Mise-en-scene reflects many of the key themes of horror. I think the location is perfect for a horror scene. The underground basement feel and the never ending darkness around him make it seem like there’s no escape, no way out. Additionally the actor is directly addressing the audience, which draws you in a makes you feel like he’s watching you, like you are his next victim. To add to this I think the underlighting is very effective as it leaves one side of him in shadows creating mystery, and it distorts the other side of him brilliantly making him appear very frightening and disturbing.

4.) What would you do differently in hindsight?
In hindsight I would change a few things if I was to do this shoot again. The shot that turned out to be the best was the one that we didn’t plan – it was just spur of the moment as we realised our surrounding would create a very strong shot. Therefore I would’ve liked to have really planned it and taken more than one in that area to see if they all turned out as good. Additionally I would have not had the actor holding his own light I would have someone sitting on the floor (in the shadows so they can’t be seen) shining the light up on the actor. Or I would have the actor holding a torch or lantern to make it part of the scene not just a spotlight. As well as this I would’ve liked to put the actor in scarier clothes because in this shot you can clearly see that he wearing an everyday t shirt and shirt, however if he was wearing all black or a long coat or cloak I think he would’ve looked even scarier and therefore the shot would’ve been even more disturbing.