WRITE-up 1
Introduction For this assignment you will write a na
ative and mise-en-scène analysis of a film
screened at Cinestudio over the next two weeks. As we have discussed in class, the critical
analysis of a film’s mise-en-scène depends on first having one or more hypotheses regarding its
na
ative and themes – what the film is really about. Once you have a few basic hunches as to
what the film is about, i.e. what its main effects or goals are, then you are in a position to
ecognize how specific elements of its mise-en-scène support and reinforce those effects o
goals, and gather the raw material to present a critical analysis of how na
ative and
mise-en-scène work together.
Read this entire assignment sheet over carefully before you take the plunge.
Step One: See a film in Cinestudio, take notes on it, discuss it with your friends.
The Cinestudio schedule is available at http:
www.cinestudio.org
With Dune playing tomo
ow night (Timmy fans take notice) and Nightmare Alley and Shortbus
lined up for this weekend = make plans with that special someone but quick…
For this assignment you must see a film at Cinestudio and use it as the basis for your analysis.
You should have a pen and paper handy to jot down a few notes while you are watching the
film; even better would be a pen, paper and clipboard to jot down as many notes as you can.
You can also – and this is the prefered non-buzz kill option - take some time immediately afte
the screening to jot down notes, or, if you see the film with others from class, or you
oomates/entourage - have a discussion
ainstorming session about it. This is the best, most
natural way to infect each other with your cinephile eurekas (but not you-know-what).
What are you taking notes on? What are you discussing? As outlined in our post-Citizen Kane
class, there are three basic steps to generating ideas for a na
ative and mise-en-scène
analysis: reconstructing or segmenting the film's na
ative, developing one or more hypotheses
about the main effects or goals of that na
ative, and reflecting on how the mise-en-scène of the
film supports or reinforces those goals or effects.
Step Two: Brainstorming with friends = It’s totally cool!!! not a problem if I get great papers that
make roughly the same argument. As long as I don’t get the same papers.
1. Start by focusing on the na
ative and themes. What happens in the film? Describe the
na
ative action and identify key events that make up that action. To answer this question you
may find it useful to sketch out a segmentation of the film. What questions, expectations,
interests, etc. does the spectator develop as they watch the film?
Some more specific questions can also help you get a handle on the na
ative: Is the na
ation
estricted or unrestricted? What traits can one ascribe to the main characters? How deep into
the psychology of the characters does the film take us? Which characters seem to be in control
of na
ative events? Which characters seem to be most affected by the action? What is at stake
in the na
ative, i.e. what are the possible outcomes that the spectator is considering as he/she
watches the film? 2. With some hypotheses about the film's na
ative in place, focus on the
acting. In analyzing the acting try to consider the following checklist of aspects: eyelines; facial
expressions, physical gestures, posture and "body language"; blocking - the positions and
movements of figures relative to each other, key props, and the setting; the notable presence o
absence of physical contact; dialogue. Reviewing these dimensions of the performances of the
actors may allow you to develop claims to support your main hypotheses.
3. With one or more critical hunches in place, turn to consider the remaining aspects of
mise-en-scène: setting, costume and makeup, and lighting. You might start by trying to
characterize the mise-en-scène in general terms. Is the film shot mainly on location or in a
studio? Does the setting seem realistic or stylized? Does it use available or artificial lighting?
Remember that such questions only lay out a rough spectrum of possibilities and that any
specific film may combine elements from both ends of the spectrum.
What you really need to do is recognize patterns like the spirals in Vertigo, the contrast in
costumes, make-up, hairstyles, acting styles between Madelaine and Judy in Vertigo, the
triangle blocking in Kane, key props like the sled in Kane, the function of the bus as location in
Bus 174, etc. – you probably won’t find any of that in any of the films at Cinestudio. But you get
to discover what’s there, that’s the fun of it. Try to find two-three patterns, two-three critical
claims you can make about how the mise-en-scene supports your hypothesis about what the
film is really about.
Step Three: Organizing and Writing the Analysis.
Make sure you start with a condensed (3-5 long sentences) summary of the na
ative, followed
y clear and developed thesis statement (2-3 sentences) and that you demonstrate that thesis
over the course of the analysis.Your argument will also involve making and demonstrating the
validity of 2-3 claims about how specific elements of mise-en-scène function to support the
na
ative.
(Please note: specific means how lighting is used - low-key? high-key? a pattern of contrast
etween the two as in Kane? – a claim that the film “uses lighting to develop theme X” = no
kidding.)
Your evidence for those claims will consist of references to the film that employ the critical
categories and concepts we have been learning. You can assume that you are writing fo
someone who has seen the film and knows or remembers the plot and characters of the film,
ut who does not know how the film "works" – i.e. how the elements of mise-en-scène you
chose to focus on function as part of the film's aesthetic system.