To preface this entry, I have found myself perplexed and amazed for the past couple of hours. I sit down this little netbook, and the meaning of A Single Man (2010) I have taken away is still in my mind. “A happy death comes when you are content with life.” I sit here, and I think it over in my mind. It seems romanticized, and I admit that I find myself flattered by such notions of noble lives and deaths. For when it is when we live and pass on by such standards, I believe that we truly live what we have been given.
As per the assignment, I have looked over a review of Tom Ford’s A Single Man. Maryann Johanson , a self claimed “Flick Filosopher”, writes to the exact contrary of what Susan Sontag writes in her paper, “Against Interpretation”. Johanson writes that even though the film is visually engaging, it lacks anything else. She states that it lacks story and character and that the film fails to utilize the “…more than capable star”. Essentially, Johanson immediately comes off having the modern notion of viewing films based on the actors that star in the films and leaves little to no room for broadening her biased interpretive views. Furthermore, Johanson goes on to elaborate the scene where the protagonist and his long time friend (and former sexual partner) spend New Year’s Eve together. She describes of the depravity that the scene has smoking and alcohol to be seen as encouraged of a “pure” decade. Clearly the mescaline reference rolled straight over her head. In addition, she limits the review to only the plot and pairings of actors and how well they mesh. In short, NO, it does not at all go with Sontag’s description of a proper review. Secondly it can be improved by maybe thinking for just a bit longer before going to the keyboard and limiting oneself to modern criticism of what comes off to be a visually engaging film. (The link to the review is below)
With this being said, I shall take my best attempt to begin solving the 1000 piece puzzle that lies within the film’s structure. Ford really drove home the use of camera angles as a means to communicate emotion, and points of intrigue and desire to the audience. Ford primarialy uses medium close-up shots to limit our range of vision and distraction to see exactly the looks of the characters on screen. This is prevalent in all of the conversations in the film. Among what I noticed with the conversations, is that most of them were not shot for shot. These shots were also selectively focused, for most of the background items during long periods of conversation and when Ford wanted us to see the characters in the foreground, he would only focus on them, leaving all else blurred.
In short, by using these forms of camera angles, Ford restricts us to what he wants us to see and interpret, no matter how uncomfortable we get.
The idea that many modern critics fall into the pattern of writing about actors and actresses is unfortunately a prevalent practices among many film critics. Many times while reading a review, we find ourselves finding more about an actors past performance and comparisons to those past works rather than any critique of their work the film they are critiquing, at east that is my opinion. For example, the critic you choose, Johanson, seems to feel the need to beg why she isn’t seeing the full use of Colin Firth, or what she is used to seeing from him. However, she fails to recognize that the movies acting, even when emotional, is meant for a visual effect in creation of a harmony between all elements of the film, rather than focusing on a specific actors prowess or abilities. And I must agree that she also looks too shallowly at the drinking and smoking to what the filmmakers are trying to do. For example, in one scene where George is smoking with another man, the camera slows down to capture the smoke leaving slowly from the man’s lips, focusing on the slight movements of his lips in contrast with the soft texture of the smoking that frames the lips. With this, the audience can see, as you presented, that the camera angles and use of close-up shots create a form in which an artistic variant of the movie is conveyed through the film rather than focusing tremendously on the specific actor who is playing which part.
ReplyDeleteThat is, to say the least, a very poignant post, Kevin. The quote you start with, “A happy death comes when you are content with life,” is the part of your blog entry that made me sit and think the most. It is a very interesting stance to take, one that I feel can be either easily agreed or disagreed with, and definitely deserves some further attention.
ReplyDeleteWhile it might be argued by some that the way his death occurred left a bitter taste in the mouth of people who saw this movie, or even that it was a poor ending and in no way related to the central theme, I would strongly disagree. The entire length of the film is filled with references to Colin Firth’s character wanting to kill himself, and we are led to believe on more than one occasion that he is very serious about it – buying bullets, getting his things in order, seeing people he cares about. It is a brilliant twist that he is sad for almost the whole time until he hangs out with the student and gives an internal speech about fleeting moments of happiness before croaking of a heart attack (also referenced throughout the film by the camera shots focusing on his Bayer Aspirin). This is a great use of what you noted, namley the way Ford uses camera angles to communicate with the audience.