We will look at that scene from Kane in a couple of weeks. For now, it strikes me that GNGL plays more with the boundary between fiction and documentary but ultimate genuflects more to the historical veracity of the documenatary. Throughout the film, layers of exposition butt against one another:
We have the original news documentary footage, the characters commenting on the footage, and a title placing the historical time of the diegesis. Film theorist Colin McCabe speaks of "hierarchies of discourse" in the classic realist text - narration, that is, signals certain voices and truths to be subordinate to the film's (or novel's) worldview. Here, the hierarchy works through double reversal, shifting the historical into the fictional, then shifting the fictional back into the historical. Formally, the complexity is more destabilizing than the classical historical picture - of the sort George Custen is dealing with - while preserving the basic ideology of historical veracity.
Furthermore, having seen The Queen recently, I'm wondering if this formal complexity/ideological simplicity might be a generalized trend.
10 comments:
I think the way Good Night and Good Luck was done worked perfectly for the story the filmmakers were trying to tell. The entire time you feel like you're a part of Ed Murrow's team. The way it was shot made it seem even more like you were in the story. At some points, the camera would quickly move to a person who begins to speak, but the focus isn't perfect right away, giving it the effect that it's like a documentary. I really liked this movie and, having seen it a few times before, I was able to pick up even more things about the different techniques the film utilized throughout the story.
When first talking about this movie and how the filmmakers used techniques from documentary filmmaking I didn't have too much to say. After thinking about it, there were many techniques taken from the documentary play book even though this films falls into the genre of a Drama. The movie is based an a true story and depicts real people and evens goes as far as using actually archived footage of events that have taken place. I can see Clooney wanted to add the highest level of realism with this movie so adopting techniques used in documentaries was one of the ways to add that level of realism. I even fell for the McCarthy speech being the actual speech and not some representation. But that is what makes the film creative, by blurring the lines of what was real and what was recreated. They accomplished what was set out to be accomplished.
I think what helps Good Night and Good Luck is that, as I said in class, is the fact that we learn about this very thing in a portion of our history classes in high school. We are familiar with these images of McCarthy and the actors are so similar looking in their appearence and color (black and white) that they just fit so well together. I wonder how someone would look at this from a comunist background or someone who did not grow up in the American Education system. I think that would be interesting to find out. Overall I thought the film was wonderful and very enjoyable.
One point in Good Night and Good Luck that I think helps the viewer imagine that the world they're watching is not one created cinematically, but one historically, is that the only music heard in the film is grounded in the world of the movie. We see the musicians and singer in the CBS studio and we even see the characters interact with that set. I think this was a clever way to present the audience with instrumentation to help them understand the emotions they are supposed to be feeling at the times in the film, without constantly calling to mind that they are being influenced by the film makers.
While watching Good Night and Good Luck, I spent the whole time wondering whether or not any movie could legitamately argue the topic of objectivity in the media. Any movie is going to have some amount of bias, be it conscious or otherwise. I think the documantary feel of the movie helped draw attention away from the irony by giving it a more factual feel.
I find myself incredibly picky and very detail concience when it comes to present day films that are correctly trying to mimic a certain passage of time that happend anywhere from fifty to hundreds of years ago. However, I found Good Night and Good Luck to be done quite beautifully. Whether it was camera angles, set design/props, usage of archive footage, acting and dialogue - everything was done extremely well. I must say, I absolutely love how television was depicted, even in this era - it was exactly as it is today, to be nothing more than a media frenzy, a large play on words - things are shown exactly as those behind the camera want them to be percieved. I was never aware that even in the time frame, when this movie was to have taken place, that in the more adolescent stages of its development television was indeed being looked at in that light. Interesting.
Í'm not sure I'd classify GNGL as a documentary, but it definitly had a documentary like effect without being too foward. I'd add more to this, but to be honest, I'm still exploring how/why I think some pieces are in fact documentary, and some aren't.
But yeah - all in all, well done, Mr. Clooney.
Good Night and Good Luck was a film that certainly blured the boundries between fiction and documentary. As we talked about in class there were many devices used to make this point. The use of archival footage gave me the ability to get lost in the fact that this film was partially a fictionaly story. Of course it was based on true event but whether or not some of the events occured in real life is most likely just a way to spice up the interest for the audience.
Good Night and Good Luck dripped with nostalgic references to a time long passed. Not being a baby boomer, I have difficulty discerning what is fact and what is fiction on a topic that took place so many decades ago.
What impressed me the most as a cinematographer was their attention to recreating the "shooting style" of the era, along with the musical moods and overall cinematic atmosphere.
The class screening was the second time I'd seen it, and I think I took more away with that reiteration. Since I am only versed in the Murrow/McCarthy information to the extent that it appears in Trivial Pursuit, I was forced to pay more attention to plot than style initially.
I truly believe that it is a masterpiece and a time capsule; assuming that its content falls closer to fact than fiction. A superb choice for discussion.
I'm intrigued about what Eli said regarding not being a baby boomer. It brings up an interesting point regarding age. And to combine that with what TJ said regarding the type of person watching it (communist/capitalist), the film then takes on different interpretations. So then, what does this movie mean to different people of different societies? I am always interested in objectivity of the viewer as well as the filmmaker. For me, I did not grow up in a generation where there was a public fear that capitalism might be jeopardized by communism. Because of that, I didn't feel as strongly about the communist cause, and likewise some of the scenes, specifically the historical footage with the senator, seemed silly. But I could see older members of society, both here and abroad, reacting differently to this. Perhaps more emotionally, perhaps more understanding, I really don't know. Seeing how the movie gets its point across so well to everyone, they must have succeeded in both revealing AND informing the younger generation about this time period. So, we end up with a great story about a group of courageous reporters, but also a history lesson in some ways. Pretty cool.
While watching this film, and experiencing the way in which it was shot, the viewer feels as though they are just another employee experiencing this event along with the rest of the employees at CBS. Because it is so intimate and we see the behind-the-scenes events as well as Murrow's television appearances, one is drawn into their world and ultimately feels for each of the characters, although it is such an ensemble piece. Kudos to Clooney for creating a world that invites the audience in.
Post a Comment