So when looking at Bonnie and Clyde you have to remember that there was a lot going on at the time of its production and release not to mention the actual message behind the movie itself.
So lets go back to 1960's America, at the time there were a lot of movements and system shake-ups that were having dramatic effect on the world around them like the Women's liberation movement or the Anti-Vietnam movement or the Hippie movement but all of them had one thing in common. Shaking up the normal and having a pop at established society of the time. Like we've discussed before MASH was a commentary on Vietnam but based in Korea to make sure that the film and its contents would be protected because there were restrictions when it came to making jokes against the government or the effort. So what did Bonnie and Clyde do?
Well they went against the norm in a different way and actually have been claimed to be the catalyst for the start of these types of films. If you think about it you can see why, most women would probably have been at home while the men held office or similar jobs doing the work for the support at home. Bonnie and Clyde shakes this up in quite a big way by having it as two people who granted at first glance meet that conformity going around and basically destroying the established stereotype by being criminals.
This trend of just straight bashing what's been built by the government continues with one of the characters (CW) having a tattoo, now while we may consider this normal today back in the 60's people were criticized for it as it's marking ones body permanently. Now you may be thinking "Well it was just the character so they used make-up, why are people so upset?" You'd be wrong because the actor who plays CW actually got a tattoo just for the film with his father criticizing his choice.
Now all the films that were a part of the new wave followed this pattern of experimental non conformity like Easy Rider which gave mind altering drugs and long cuts of seemingly anything possible, but that's what these films are about, the idea to break-up and shake up what you've been taught and told to go be unique and different to mess what society says you have to be before going to bed and doing it again the next day.
Well hopefully this has helped with a little more background on Bonnie and Clyde and why it was as influential as you'd think.
Here is a clip from my interpretation of a new wave film that features monochrome/black & white main images, emphasis on sounds like the music and extended shots with seemingly invisible cuts.
The basic idea behind this was to take some of the shots/pieces that are seen in the American new wave and its influence (political commentary and French new wave) and make it about how life almost has gone backwards with lockdown in effect whilst promoting safety within the current climate. As you can tell by the footage it's all handheld with minimum stability with the movements of the scene as I move.
The thought process was that the American New Wave made commentaries on the scenes or trends within current politics, as we know COVID is the biggest influence and news of this year and it can feel isolating and to some almost like they're going backwards.
Hence some of the shots having almost no one in them highlighting the isolation with the homes and quarantine, then the actual story line of the story seemingly going backwards in time.
So on to the critique of the work, overall I feel that I achieved my goal of making a comment on the impact of the current environment that the government has shown meeting the general type of film made within the 1960's-70's America at the time, it was also low-budget just me, my phone and some help from the internet for sounds further reflecting on the statistical side of the New Wave development. Enough about the theory and backing what about the clip itself and well I feel like I captured a number of points and edits in the piece, for example the sound and visual alignment towards the end of the clip builds scale and emotion around the environment of the character and what's happening to them. The transitions between them help to keep the flow running smoothly and not breaking the audience out of the experience. Another is the overlay on top of the scenes, having the low opacity of the images and clips on top of the video help to build an ominous feel whilst giving reminders of the government impact on the character (which explains the flashes of Boris on the overlay).
Now where did it go wrong? Well from the top there were a few health and safety issues along with privacy problems too, such as for the reverse walking scene I had to keep an eye out behind me whilst walking which limits my visibility and also makes the possibility of capturing something whilst filming with the camera facing the opposite direction. The next health and safety issue was that whilst walking my feet weren't stable at the angle of walking for the shot making it a risk of falling and damaging me or the equipment. As I mentioned earlier there was also a privacy risk and that was similar to what I mentioned earlier about not being able to see the camera whilst walking backwards so if someone or something got into frame that wasn't supposed to be there then that could cause a lot of issues further down the pipeline.
Other than the issues filming lets go to the editing, going back over the footage captured within the clip did make a few problems like trying to align audio to fit clips and where there's edits in trying to blend them to ensure that the transitions seem more real and like a sequence rather than having it as a series of individual clips. The other one was trying to make sure that video clarity was still good and strong when putting in the black & white filters and overlays on top of the raw video files and having the transition effects at the right points to reflect the general theme of the clip.
To sum up from the review, overall I feel as though I achieved what I set out to do but in future I need to reflect on the problems and issues that I brought up for the next project.
Easy Riders Raging Bulls by Peter Biskind: ["Being an outlaw was a great thing to want to be, whether it was Clyde Barrow or Abbie Hoffman. All the stuff we wrote had to do with epater le bourgeois, shaking society up, saying to all the squares, 'We don't do that, man, we do our thing.' But the thing we loved about Bonnie and Clyde wasn't that they were bank robbers, because they were lousy bank robbers. The thing about them that made them so appealing and relevant, and so threatening to society, was that they were aesthetic revolutionaries. In our view, what kills Bonnie and Clyde is not that they broke the law, because no one liked the fucking banks-but that they put a tattoo on C. W. Moss. His father says, 'I can't believe that you let these people put pictures on your skin.' This is what the '60s turned out to be about."]
Hollywood From Vietnam To Reagan...And Beyond [For references of film analysis]
So what exactly is a new wave and what happens? Well during a great period of change within the country that then boosts the film industry that it then causes new ideas and concepts to be brought forward with new techniques. The precursor to all of them was by the French as they brought with them new concepts such as authors and camera styles that then become unique to the Director of the film. The actual name for these is auteur and camera stylo which we can link to a certain style of camera movement that the director then becomes known for. It's almost similar to that of a creative signature that you'd see on a piece of art (which also got re-vamped in this wave but it's not overly relevant).
So how does this all link to the American New Wave, well if we look at techniques used then we start to see some greater influences such as the extended cut. This is where the scene or shot has the camera in a specific position with the emphasis on the scene for an extended period of time without cutting, this allows for more meaning to be built for characters yet it can then become part of a directors signature. Yet this is not one of the biggest parts of the American New Wave, that comes from the basis of the contents and context of what's happening at the time. How is this relevant? Well look at a lot of films from the period of the sixties to seventies what was going on, well you have the Vietnam war one of the worst for America as the actual cost of the time and resources that went into it for as long as it did had a large impact to the economy and the industry as a whole, next was the movement of the time which was a hippie/free-love type so it was about mind-bending drugs and altered perspectives which gave way to a lot of different camera moves and edits.
So what was made with the New American Wave? The first thing would be the topics contained within them such as MASH, now during the period of the sixties the cold war was raging and the war had gotten over to Vietnam and this is quite possibly one of the most unpopular wars within modern history because of the expense and the effect across both America and Vietnam. It gave rise to film creators making clear but changed messages about the war hence MASH, so you can see within the contexts certain films gain an extra layer of depth.
The story is that it follows a group during the Korean war and the effect that it has on the group that's a part of an American camp. If you follow actions of the characters some of it seems to be a minor comment on the insanity that the Americans faced during the war, which the film kind of follows as it goes along with the series f events that goes across the entire film until the end. If you look at the football game there's another metaphor within it even though both sides are American, there's one side which has the upper-hand almost endlessly (Vietnamese) then another side which seems to be at the underhand of everything no matter what they try (American) which reinforces the metaphor of the futility of the American campaign.
Another example to give to support the idea of depth would be two that relate in different ways, one is Easy Rider. In brief it's about a road trip between two friends that sort of hints at the idea of freedom and none conformity with the social norms of the time. Of course this was already well versed in America at the time because at the time it was brought from the death of Kennedy and then the government started to bring the hammer down on the drugs and other things that the movement brought.
This was then brought into the industry with films such as Easy Rider to highlight or better demonstrate in a more visual way the idea of free-love and drugs that went against the system standard.
However going back to the techniques used, there's an iconic one that was made popular with the French and that is the long cut. If you remember back to the Cemetery trip scene from a previous post that had a near three minute continuous cut of them just being sat in the graveyard with almost no dialogue exchange between characters which was a popular method of the French as they too had similar long stretches where there was either all diegetic or non-diegetic without any audio playing over.
If you look back at the Cemetery scene it starts out calm and measured with an extended cut for almost the entire length of the clip which then gets changed to a lot of quick cuts and visuals to demonstrate the chaos of the drug but also to demonstrate the damage that it seems to do to the person/people taking them.
Earlier I mentioned that I was drawing from two films for this section on the idea of freedom and going against the system that this movement brought with it, the second is an earlier film form the 60's called Bonnie and Clyde.
When looking at this there's a good source within a book by Peter Biskind (Quote and name in research links post) that details not only what made them so popular with the themes of the time [this made them more relatable for the public] but also what was considered far enough to sink the film.
But as previously mentioned this was at the time of free-love and the need to go against traditional society as while the idea of them and the actual art behind them (dubbed a renaissance) and so this developed more yet they were still frowned upon if use the book as an example.
So how do these two films link, surely there's no way that a film about motorbikes and drugs could relate to another about bandits and robbers but the basic message is the same, it's about going against the system and the norms of the period and they're the almost poster models for it.
The story follows a couple as they travel and go on the run for robberies of banks and other such things but it all comes to end when they get shot by a law pose at the end of the film, the reason why this is significant is because it goes against the norms of the time for these two people since maybe it would be calm and measured jobs like an office rather than going everywhere robbing and getting into trouble. During the sixties was also the women liberation movement and this movement reflects on it by giving the women the chance to go against what was deemed normal and show that you can do something huge and extraordinary even if the impact is negative or exposes the world.
When editing you always have to think about the rules, this then gives you the guide for what you can break when doing your next piece of editing. This comes under what's known as the Rule of 6 and these are the general rules that you should follow or think about while making your story, normally above all story is what you'd expect to be the key thing to think about or focus on but actually this isn't true. While the story of a scene is important emotion always comes first when bringing together a scene, this helps to get an audience reaction but more importantly sell your scene.
Now onto the film of choice for today, we're looking at the scar scene this helps us to connect with the characters on screen and give more meaning behind the story and their connections to it.
Now in the editing for this scene we see two opposing characters bonding with the protagonist seeming to be on the outside of the two.
In these two frames we see the lighting is dark around everywhere but the center of the table which they're on. This helps to draw the viewers to focus on that point making their actions more meaningful as they're paying attention to that point.
It also helps to follow the 180 degree as they have a reference point to use but also a singular point of focus where they can now draw meaning from their text.
However lighting and mis-en-scene aren't all that's used to give the text meaning but the type of shot as well. It's a very close-up shot giving little of the surroundings away making the audiences eyes zoom in on the scene before them. It's not just what's not around them but the length too, this scene is almost a three minute long shot of these two characters interacting.
This is all helping to establish the characters with their experiences and allowing us to bond with them much deeper than at just face value, as we can see it seems to be mainly focused on two characters who aren't even technically the protagonist which links back to the rule of six that I mentioned earlier where you draw on emotions for meaning before story. Which if you think about it makes sense to the scene, ordinarily this would be almost contextual but for the emotion of the moment and the characters in it this has been included but in one long cut too making the emphasis that this more important to the characters and the emotional link rather than any full impact to the story itself.
Another thing which is key throughout all of these scenes is that the two characters on screen are almost constantly getting closer to each other making it seem more and more like there's a connection between them.
We see that the camera still hasn't moved or followed any of the usual rules that we know for cinematography which can normally mean that the emphasis is on the environment like an establishing shot for the surroundings rather than character focus.
However this scene goes against the norm by having its focus be how close the characters are getting (symbolising the new unity from their shared experiences) whilst highlighting that all we've seen of these two is how different they are from each other but in actuality probably have more in common.
Again we see that the lighting is consistent in highlighting what the scene needs the focus on at that moment bringing the audiences focus to it and therefore drawing their attention away from anything else. The way that the camera is angled to almost reflect off the fact that these two are sharing a wide range of experiences and emotions, almost makes it seem like an outsiders point of view where only the characters on screen know the true depth behind each mark.
This POV turns out to be a strong one as when the camera next cuts it's to the main character watching from the side out of the light and the main focus of the scene almost pushed aside, like an outsider. Having this cut in the place that it is gives an important emphasis to the characters themselves and their emotions, for example like here we see Roy Scheider's character looks almost uncomfortable to go and join them in the main part of this scene.
Then as we see by this shot we can see why he's on the outside, the only scar he has is from an operation not any sort of experience with a shark or some other form of creature.
One really important thing of note here is that the shots are identical but the light that just highlighted his face has more emphasis and has moved lower to the part that's exposed to the camera drawing the audiences eye to what's changed and maybe why he's not joined them.
A potential reason why the editor chooses to cut away only once they almost get to the end of the scar show-off as it were could be that there was to be a specific emphasis on the effect that each has on the story, listing off each one with a how gives the audience a sense of direction. That instead of the protagonist taking charge as is the norm in film they instead choose two characters that were only introduced mere moments ago contrasting the usual etiquette and structure of films, however it's not just the switch between them that gives a purpose but the length.
Having the two secondary protagonists who don't really relate to the story with more screen time than the main protag shows the style of the editor and DP, it shows us that they wanted to give everything they could a meaning behind it like for example to characters who act as opposites bonding over shared experiences or how isolated the main seems because he hasn't had the same as the others.
In summary it's like I stated before the editor chooses cuts and shots to create meaning behind the text that they're presenting and certainly in this case they've kept to the structure we know and placed emotion before story whilst making sure they connect.
Hopefully this has given you a better insight into how editors give different or specific meanings in the texts that they create.
I was watching easy rider the other day and while I was enjoying it I realised that maybe a lot of the meanings behind what was going would be missed by a standard movie goer, so I thought I breakdown one scene to help you figure out some of the deeper meaning behind what's going on.So let's get to it, the scene that I'll be analysing is the Cemetery Acid Trip scene
Right away we see and hear a lot so let's go through this first piece, in this introduction we see the four main characters in what would be considered unusual clothing. This helps us get a time period for this film, based on other factors around them like a lot of grass (which could be symbolic of later on in the piece) and the sounds of almost industrial mining equipment we can tell that the period is very early possible seventies or eighties going from rough eyeballing of the characters looks.
This is also re almost confirmed with their actions during this short dialogue free stretch, the way that they're just openly drinking in public and showing near constant affection most of the time in a more modern film there wouldn't be this level of affection between any character (except when following the trope of the genre; for example action would be after the catastrophe has been resolved) which helps us to confirm this date theory.
The type of camera shot in this scene is interesting too, it's almost between a medium and a wide shot giving us enough detail for the characters and the environment around them, making it the perfect type of shot for setting the scene with some foreshadowing whilst still being enigmatic about where they are and why they're there (which we then later learn is to take drugs) causing the start of this scene to be curious but also relaxed as there no fast-paced edits making action or quick changes to the angle and type of shot making it appear to the audience as a break almost from the main bulk.
This changes when they then take the drugs and it has some rapid changes and moves which highlights the chaos of the scene and probably the experiences that the characters have in that moment. Linking that to the hue over the entire scene (light sepia over it to add to the old feeling and an altered state that the characters enter) and the non-diegetic mix (between dialogue and the repeated sound of something banging in the background throughout the whole scene), which is a stark contrast to the relative calm of the previous scene where there was just ambience and quiet dialogue, we can tell that what happened to these characters wasn't exactly normal or what we would consider sane behaviour.
As previously mentioned there's a lot of sounds that happen all within that clip but the only bits that are non-diegetic are the ones that have been added in post (like the narration over other images linking to the person reading, or the banging continuing over everything) but it seems to rely heavily on diegetic making it more of a in the moment type of scene which further adds to the period set and made.
It looks as though it's both made and set in the late sixties/early seventies which would make sense given the grain over the film, the almost reliant use of diegetic sound that's carried throughout the entire clip to help it establish that they had to almost fully rely on what was captured in the moment rather than being able to add or change things in post as well as they are now. It helps to create atmosphere and immersion within the surroundings as it comes from the actual scene itself, almost like an audio mis-en-scene as well as a visual one too.
Lighting was another overarching theme throughout too, having a slightly sepia filter over the scene where they're sat before doing drugs helps to reinforce this sort of calm given from the scene, it has a warm kind of glow to it helping for this appealing yet calm feel at the beginning when they're establishing the acid drop where the filter has gone and it all seems to drop a shade or two in colour grading; maybe hinting at an almost dark decent once it started.
Hopefully this has given you a better idea of some of the things to keep an eye out for when watching a film and what they mean when you spot them!
