Scenario: You have been commissioned by a prestige UK home video production company to contribute information to a booklet being produced to coincide with the launch of a limited edition DVD/Blu Ray release of your chosen film. The company in question have requested you produce an informative illustrated essay aimed at their audience, who are passionate and educated in film. The essay will show how genre analysis and the auteur theory can be applied to one film of your choice from the list of optional directors. Your assignment will take the form of written essay, separated into two sections and submitted as a post on your online blog once complete.
Section 1
This should focus on applying genre theory to your chosen film and demonstrating how the film can be seen to fit within the context of genre. It should consider generic codes and conventions, recognisable traits, iconography etc. You must:
- Make specific reference to the film (i.e. scene examples)
- Make specific reference to relevant terminologies when analysing
- Engage with relevant theory/theorists (e.g. Steve Neale, or applicable narrative)
Genre Theory
Conventional definitions of genres tend to be based on the notion that they constitute particular conventions of content (such as themes or settings) and/or form (including structure and style) which are shared by the texts which are regarded as belonging to them.
Section 2
This should focus on applying auteur theory to your chosen film and demonstrating how the film can be seen to fit within the context of the work of the director. You must:
- Identify cinematic traits that suggest authorship
- Make specific reference to the film (i.e. scene examples)
- Make specific reference to relevant terminologies when analysing
- Provide some auteur context with comparisons to other films in the directorial canon
The Auteur Theory
“The strong director imposes his own personality on a film; the weak director allows the personalities of others to run rampant” - Andrew Sarris
In film criticism, auteur theory holds that a director's film reflects the director's personal creative vision, as if they were the primary "auteur" (the French word for "author"). This must be applied in the assignment when analysing as part of the task.
Choice of film: Apocalypse Now
Article: Apocalypse then, auteur now
Apocalypse Now is considered to be one of the best Vietnam War movies of all time, as well as one of the best movies ever made. Famous movie critic Roger Ebert (among others) consider it to be a masterpiece, with Ebert placing it on his list for the 2002 Sight & Sound poll for the greatest movie of all time. The story behind the creation of the movie, during production process, is a truly incredible one too, as can be explored with Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse.
Section 1 - Genre Theory
Apocalypse Now is defined as an epic war movie in the same vein as Saving Private Ryan and Full Metal Jacket. But what sets apart this particular movie from its predecessors and even its successors, is the angle it takes when it comes to studying the themes surrounding war and beyond, and not just particularly the war in Vietnam. Coppola himself said "My film is not about Vietnam, it is Vietnam", talking about the toll the production took on the cast and crew. In his original review, Ebert wrote, "Apocalypse Now achieves greatness not by analyzing our 'experience in Vietnam', but by recreating, in characters and images, something of that experience". This, I believe, is what can be applied to the genre theory.
Though the backdrop of the film is Vietnam and the war, it is not necessarily about the war itself, but as Ebert put it, re-creating the experience. The director said that he wanted to take the audience "through an unprecedented experience of war and have them react as much as those who had gone through the war". One of the best examples of this technique was the movies use of fog, which is prevalent throughout.
Reference 1. Capt. Willard (Martin Sheen) encounters the French soldiers occupying a plantation up river. If anyone were to see this image they could easily pick out the codes and conventions of the war film genre. Fog could be easily mistaken for smoke grenades or the residue from gunfire or bombs. The uniforms as well, military fatigues, as well as the weapons held, indicate soldiers of war. The intended impact of this imagery is almost ghostly, as the set and location, Vietnam, has this mystical feel, better enhanced with the use of fog. The soldiers emerge from nowhere before Capt. Willard, ghosts of the past (the French originally having Vietnam as one of their own colonies before a war for independence). They make for an intimidating presence and one could argue that they serve as a cautionary tale to the American forces in Vietnam, as the French Foreign Legion were once defeated by the Vietnamese.
The use of fog is reminiscent of the term “the fog of war”, which refers to the lack of situational awareness experienced by individuals during military operations. This is reinforced by both the characters and plot, as Captain Willard and the boat crew both experience the fog of war; the former not truly knowing what he’ll do when he finds his target, the latter kept in the dark as to why they are sailing up river. Introduced by the Prussian military analyst Carl von Clausewitz, he says the following about the fog of war:
“War is the realm of uncertainty; three quarters of the factors on which action in war is based are wrapped in a fog of greater or lesser uncertainty. A sensitive and discriminating judgment is called for; a skilled intelligence to scent out the truth.”
Truth is also a motif found in the film, as Coppola himself defined the movie as “anti-lie”, saying "...the fact that a culture can lie about what's really going on in warfare, that people are being brutalized, tortured, maimed, and killed, and somehow present this as moral is what horrifies me, and perpetuates the possibility of war". This is what Coppola sets out to achieve with the movie. But how does it apply to genre and appeal to genre?
Well, the idea of the ‘fog of war’ and ‘anti-lie’ are quite the spins on the war epic genre, as Coppola himself says that most war movies, by nature, are anti-war. However, Coppola and screenwriter John Milius wanted to go beyond that. Milius, the screenwriter, was known for his hawkish politics and it is for that reason many actually look at Apocalypse Now as a pro-war film. However, that does not mean Milius intended to do away with authenticity, and in fact it was Coppola himself who edited the script heavily.
Focusing solely on the mise-en-scene, one will already decide that this movie is indeed within the epic war genre. And what better scene to showcase this than the infamous “Flight of the Valkyries” scene.
Reference 2. Instantly one would spring to mind that this is an action orientated movie, with explosions surrounding the scene as well as fire and smoke being prevalent. The image contains helicopters flying overhead causing destruction, and the shot itself establishes the scene and environment, with the intent of showing the utter dominance of air superiority and the advantages the Americans hold over their enemies. Even so, this would prove ineffective in the long term, as Search & Destroy missions could only accomplish so much. Speaking purely from this image’s standpoint however, we see wholescale battle ensuring and the evidence of air support proving better.
Helicopters fly over in an epic fashion, unloading machine guns and automatic weapons. Explosions go off and soldiers fight among the flames. This is war. This is what the audience can instantly recognize and understand about the movie.
Section 2 - Auteur Theory
Francis Ford Coppola wrote, directed and produced Apocalypse Now, among other movies such as Patton and The Godfather trilogy. The article linked above, Apocalypse then, auteur now, ironically interviews Coppola about not feeling as if he had accomplished more intimate or personal films previously while in Hollywood. So then, why would I study Apocalypse Now from an auteur point of view? I think it comes with knowing what went on behind the scenes of production of the film which contributed to the movie’s legend, as well as the thematics reinforced by the material used as well as the mise-en-scene.
Coppola’s description of the production process suits that of the American war effort in Vietnam. "We had access to too much money, too much equipment, and little by little we went insane". This was almost like art in motion in terms of what it brought to the film. Actor Martin Sheen, who played protagonist Capt. Willard, experienced a mental breakdown on set and also suffered a heart attack. The link below is an excerpt from the documentary Hearts of Darkness: A Filmmaker's Apocalypse which detailed the production nightmare the film faced.
This form of art was part of the make-up implemented on the film, as Coppola himself wanted and needed Sheen to act regardless of the pains he was suffering, and it shows us deep down how he had a vision for how the scenes of Willard’s mind breaking apart were choreographed. This is not native to Coppola’s films, as he is well known to always have a hand behind the camera and guiding his actors.
The film takes inspiration from Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, a novel he wrote based off of his experiences in the Congo Free State in 1890, where he witnessed first hand the slave trade occurring in the region. At the time many contemporary people praised Conrad’s work as progressive, as it critiqued imperialism; however, as times went on many have begun to question the elements of racism in the book, as the story portrays a white man being corrupted by “savages” and “tribals” native to the Congo. Thus, it de-humanizes Africans while indirectly raising the appeal of predominantly white-European values.
In Apocalypse Now, Coppola takes the theme of imperialism and applies it to the Vietnam War, showing the flaws of America’s attempts to takeover Vietnam and implement “democracy”. An excellent example from the film however would be when Captain Willard is briefed on his mission.
The commanding officer speaks of Colonel Kurtz, the antagonist of the film, saying he was good man. However, time among the so-called “natives” tempted him to become a “God” in their eyes. In the eyes of the military, a good man was corrupted by the savages, much like in Conrad’ novel; however, is the civilised people of the United States military any better? The attempts to dehumanize the enemy are prevalent throughout the movie, most notably when Robert Duvall’s character is introduced.
Col. Kilgore is the Commanding Officer of an air cavalry unit in the US army, and his actions point out the hypocrisy of America’s operations in Vietnam. In the aforementioned briefing scene, the officer remarks how Kurtz’s ideas and methods became “unsound”. But how is this any different to how Kilgore operates? When his men swoop in an area they kill almost indiscriminately, and Kilgore labels the dead Vietnamese with kill cards so the Viet Cong know who killed them. Furthermore, Harrison Ford’s character remarks how Kurtz’s followers obey his every command, no matter how ridiculous. Again, how is this any different to Kilgore ordering two of his men to surf in a warzone, with bullets and bombs flying overhead? The hypocrisy is real.
But how does any of this apply to auteur theory? Well the use of characters such as Col. Kilgore and Capt. Willard (anti-heroes) is not strange to Coppola, who uses the themes and motives of the movie as an extension of the characters i.e. the hypocrisy of American imperialism reflecting the senior officers and Kilgore. An example from another of Coppola’s films would be from The Godfather, in the form of central character’s Vito and Michael Corleone, both mobsters and gangsters who commit violent crimes. Atrocities and violence are committed by the soldiers, such as Willard and the boat crew’s killing of innocent Vietnamese people who were already boarded.
Also, it is important to note the use of The Heart of Darkness in Apocalypse Now, as well as the “The Hollow Men”, a poem by T. S. Elliot. The poem itself, recited by Kurtz to Willard, was inspired by the novel, which itself inspired Apocalypse Now. This is literature and art literally falling in on itself, coming full circle. It makes the effort put in fulfilled and is what really makes the movie timeless. Apocalypse Now is a storm of history, art, literature and contemporary portrayals.
Coppola is no stranger to applying literary examples to his films. The Godfather itself is an adaptation of a novel, which in turn references the Corleone family closely resembling the Karamazov family in The Brothers Karamazov: a powerful father, an impulsive oldest son, a philosophical son, a sweet-tempered son, and an adopted stepson who is maintained as an employee.
Onto cinematography, Francis Ford Coppola’s way of filming has always focused stylistic elements such as long, tracking shots, often establishing an area or following a character. Below is a great example that emphasizes scope.
Shots such as this are common in Coppola’s movies, courtesy of The Godfather.
The use of fade and dissolve on Apocalypse Now is also not uncommonly found in Coppola’s movies. Used to show how the characters are both physically and spiritually trapped in vietnam, Willard himself discusses how after his first tour all he could think about was going back into the jungle, even in Saigon, he dreams of the jungle.
Below is an example from the movie Bram Stoker’s Dracula.
The tone and colors also fit well and compliment the atmosphere that Coppola achieves. Apocalypse Now, as aforementioned, is more than just a war movie. It is a borderline psychological horror, using the Vietnam War as a background for the horrors that war brings and destroys its victim’s psyche.
No comments:
Post a Comment