The article was first published on the WeChat public account [Little Director], please indicate the source for reprinting.
Film online class registration WeChat: wyy99389505
Hairstyle as the subject of the film
Foreword This film has been released in our country. As a further reading material, we translate the creative explanations of the film's main creators: the photographer and the artist, so that the reader can understand more clearly how the creator's intention is gradually realized. It is rare to find analytical articles about the photographer and the artist of a film at the same time. If the reader has a better understanding of the conception and creation of other main creative personnel other than the screenwriter and director, it will be more helpful to deeply understand all aspects of a film. In foreign film production, especially for feature films on commercial distribution networks, not only photography is important, but also artists and the cooperation between artists and other majors is also very important. I remember that when I introduced the role of foreign artists to the class 78 of Beijing Film Academy, the students in the art department were both excited and discouraged. Because in the production of feature films in China, artists do not like to pay attention to it. If you don't pay attention to the tradition of art, how can you do it overnight, saying that you want to make a high-cost movie? Short of money? Even if you give money, it will not be spent. Because the director will not play the role of the artist, and the artist will not spend the money allocated to him. You might as well watch the TV series "Big Air Combat". The director is a graduate of the Fine Arts Department of Beijing Film Academy, but if you look at the artists in that film, it's not a question of money, but a question of whether you understand the artists. Why didn't the comments point this out? Comments are never taken seriously. We often say that you can't see an artist in a TV show. I hope readers will take this opportunity to examine the role of photography and art in a feature film. At the end of this film analysis, we have attached the introduction of the main creators and the creation chronology. This is a useful research method. By knowing a creator's range of work, we can see his style, and by knowing who they often work with, whether it's a director or a photographer or an artist, we can more easily find the style of that work. For example, we see from the director's chronology that he turned out to be an editor, so it can be expected that editing is likely to be his forte. Most of the works of photographer Kovacs belong to the New York School, so we know that he has artistic pursuits, because this is the characteristic of the New York School. For example, Taxi Driver is a work of the New York School. And the New York School didn't get much development because it didn't have the ability to build its own distribution agency, and because it didn't have much of an audience that liked it or appreciated it. As for artist Silbert, he is one of the major chief designers in Hollywood today. American 1982 color film 140 minutes BARRY) on "Francis" "If you have three very smart, creative people, you make sure that all three are doing the same film, not three different films. There will be In this case, you know, but for me, it was an exciting experience because we were able to communicate our thoughts closely with each other and find a common denominator for everything." Laszlo Kovacs describes this passage He collaborated with director Graeme Crayford and graphic designer Richard Silbert on the film "Francis". This common denominator is a common understanding of the meaning of the film, a feeling of strong emotional impact that is believed to be a consistent film that a film should have. It's a feeling for the intangible, which, while incapable of being summed up in words, influences every choice made in filmmaking. As a cinematographer, Kovacs' job is to a large extent to unearth this feeling in the early stages of filmmaking in order to translate it into lights, camera lenses; filters and frames during filming. The story of Francis Farmer is about the life of Francis Farmer. The actress starred in 14 films from 1936 to 1942 -- most famously "Come and Get It." "Francis" is a story of extremes - from her rise to stardom to her unimaginable abyss in prison and mental asylum. This is a portrait of an ultra-independent woman, an idealist, an opinionated man who is not only against religion, against her mother, but ultimately against herself. On one level, it's a story of a conflict between society and the individual, where society wins, but the story itself is an indictment of a mother, a psychic who conspired to destroy her spirit, brain surgery on her, Analyst and studio owner. On another level, the story is about a smart, beautiful, and full of life woman who, for a myriad of intricate reasons, embarks on a journey of self-destruction. "Francis" is the first film directed by Crayford. He was in Bob Revelson's "The Postman Always Rings Twice" and Kovacs in Norman Juwison's "FIST" " and several other films as editor. He and Kovacs first met while filming "A Cold Day in the Garden" in 1968, when Crayford was Robert Altman's assistant director. When Crayford called Kovac and asked him if he was interested in filming "Francis," Kovac's first reaction was "Which Francis?" Farmer knew nothing about it, but when Crayford briefly described the story to him, Kovacs immediately felt that he had to work on the film. One reason is that the film's story spans the thirties, the forties, and the fifties, and Kovacs' "FIST" ” belongs to this last period. He calls this period his absolute favorite. But more importantly, he reacted very strongly to the storyline described by Crayford. Crayford sent Kovacs a script that was still being revised and suggested that he read Farmer's biography, The Unreal, by William Arnold. After Kovacs read these two books, he spent the remaining five or six months of his pre-work time trying to absorb those who had been written by contributors Mary Yates and Jonathan Sanger as well as Crayford and Art Design. The material about Farmer collected and sorted out by teacher Richard Silbert. He felt it was necessary for the photographer to understand the various parts of the film. "It's not enough to be a cinematographer or a cameraman. You can't just light and shoot the shots. You have to understand emotionally what the characters are going through. The formation of connections and character motives. In short, the why of everything. You have to know the answers to all these whys." Of course, this is especially true for a work of character such as "Francis." Kovacs described the film as a "one-man show, all by one person". Throughout the process, Kovac's first step was to grasp as much of the situation as possible, to get as many impressions as possible, until an intuition formed in him. This may sound simple, but it is not easy to achieve. This also includes the political and economic issues at the time. If you want to understand Francis Farmer, you have to understand the labor movement of the 1930s, the theaters of New York, Hollywood... it's all complicated. She is a multi-layered character. Kovacs, Crayford, Silbert had countless conversations. They showed all of Francis Farmer's films, but the moment his inspiration really came was when he was finally able to see When it came to locations or sets, Silbert had done a lot of work before Kovacs came in. Kovacs recalled that on a trip to Seattle to see the location, Silbert took the group on a walking tour. , visited the places Farmer used to live - her house, the high school, the beach and a bar she frequented in her spare time. They visited a mental hospital where Farmer had lived for years, even though they knew they would never be Won't be allowed to shoot there. All these moments, Crayford has been articulating what he thinks of the story and what he's going to get out of all this stuff. Kovacs said: "And I just material is absorbed. I just watch, observe, ask questions, or listen to all the relevant discussions. " Finally, Kovacs begins to develop a sense of the tone or texture of the film. After he has mastered sufficient materials, he has entered the stage of fully coordinating with the director's views. "That's when you actually feel it," he said. "The feeling actually has two meanings. Not only can you feel it emotionally, but you can even feel it with your senses. You can literally touch it with your fingers. You can't precisely feel it. You can describe it, but you can already talk about the texture and tone and the various structural details. You can tell it's kind of a blunt thing here, and you know where the symmetry or movement is needed. Cova Qi Qi was fortunate to be able to work with Siebert, who he considers to be a true art designer. “His choices always felt certain and precise, exactly as the director envisioned them. He basically implemented everything that was discussed. ” While emphasizing that the director explained the plot and determined the rhythm, Kovac did not hesitate to attribute the visual image design of “Francis” to the art designers. It seems clear that “Francis” Much of the appeal of Sith is the result of Sibalt's very thoughtful and meticulous design work, and all Kovacs can do is build on it and make it better with lighting and photography styles that match it. To be beautiful. He and Siebalt had detailed discussions over and over about the composition of the image in various shots. Kovacs even said that many of Siebelt's sets seemed to actually have only one correct way to shoot them during the shoot. Kovacs was happy with that because he always understood what Sibalt was trying to achieve with a certain set and felt that it was appropriate for the film. Kovacs looked at it from several different perspectives Art design work. The most obvious of course is the consideration of the period. All the components of the sets, costumes and props have to be appropriate for the period. Kovacs in particular speaks of Sibalt's familiarity with New York and the refurbishment of the theater world. Filming helps a lot. But historical accuracy is not the focus of Sibalt's work. It's just a foundation on which he does all of his art. "Francis" is a typical example of combining all the image material with the orchestration method in the film design. Carefully chosen colors, textures, and composition provide the film with an pictorial composition that enhances the film's dramatic or narrative structure. The musical analogy for Sibelt, discussed in another article by Jay Carmichael about the production of Francis, may seem a little too abstract at first, but as long as you watch the film Looking at the stills later, you can recall how much the film's art design actually played a role in the emotionally formed orchestral effect of the audience. The natural face of Frances' home, the strong contrast between her home and Hollywood or New York, the relationship between her home and Hollywood and the mental hospital, the resolution of a series of conflicts, all expressed through color and texture, as well as dialogue and action come out. This is what Kovacs had to say about the different techniques of lighting and photography he used for the Farmer house scene: "Every time you go back to that house, it's different, something is different. Either the position of things has changed, or there are strangers in the room, etc. And these properties all have to be transformed into light, and they all have to be shown on the screen immediately. As soon as the audience sees each picture, they can understand that it is a What kind of feeling, what's going on -- before any actor speaks. That's the power of real cinema -- intense visual appeal. A picture can be more telling than a page of dialogue when it's right." Siber Another aspect of Walter's art is the way the set is used to illustrate the characters. The most prominent examples are several scenes related to Crayford Odets. This is how Kovac describes his reaction when he first saw the set for Odets' New York apartment: "It was in the shed next door to us, and I couldn't help but stick my head in and take a peek, but I said to myself, 'No, I don't want a look, I want to be there. I'm going to see it when it's all set up.'" Siebelt and set maker George Guy Enns worked closely. George Gaines has a great sense of detail, and if he knows what kind of character you're playing, he knows what kind of pen you might be using. So I decided to wait until the framing was over. When I finally walked into that finished set, I said: 'My God, is he such a person? This guy can't be so self-centered, so self-absorbed. ' I mean, the set really does reflect the character's character, and I totally understand what Sybalt was trying to convey. I feel tempted to say this to him: 'It's amazing. You make my job so easy because everything you show is so conceptually clear that anyone with a brain can understand the implications. '” One of the ways Siebelt created this impression of the Odets apartment was through the use of white. This white in the Odets apartment not only thematically connected with the Hollywood set, but created a sense of The strong monotony of the theater set on which Odette's play was rehearsed was the opposite of elegance. It was as if the two environments in which we met Odets captured exactly two aspects of his character. – An idealistic playwright and an egocentric lover. So, in the shot of Odets’ apartment, what Kovacs did was make sure there was always white in the frame. He said: “Although it was Odets , also has a large, loose white shirt sleeve that I give special emphasis. Or, when the theatre manager told Francis that she couldn't go to London with the show, she stood up, and all you see behind her are the white bookcases and the white hall. And she was wearing a dark dress with a black belt. No red, blue, yellow, pink, etc. There are no other colors. Even the flowers used in the shots of the Odets apartment are white lilies. In addition to the color combination, the choice of furniture and props also adds to the sense of Odette's character. Kovac can think of instances where Siebert came over to him during a shoot and said, don't put a certain something into the shot because he recognized that it was appropriate for the time, but it was not suitable for the character. Kovacs cites another powerful example of this approach to character on set, Francis The office used by my father. "It's a weird office space. Siebelt seeks grandeur to contrast the father's condition - not to demean him, but to show that he is barely a lawyer for a beggar, a drunk and a poor man. Your first thought is that his office is probably a little comfort zone somewhere. You will also specifically envision: Dirty walls, stained windows, a small desk, no pictures on the walls, nothing to see. However, Siebelt chose a lobby of a once prosperous restaurant. These have marble columns and stained glass. The camera now goes down, with his desk in the corner of the mezzanine hall next to a pay phone. This is where the beggars often come, sitting on the sofas and chairs around them, waiting. According to Kovacs, the script does not point out that the office is in such a place, and in fact there is no basis for it. This is a heavy stroke by Sibalt for his father's situation. Kovacs said: "This is It was his intuition that inspired me as a cinematographer. But you first have to accept this idea, you have to understand what he is after. You also have to realize that sometimes the closest route from A to B in a film is not a straight line. It's hard to tell how you know when to take the most direct path and when to take a detour to illustrate the problem visually. "Another set that Kovacs thought was brilliant was the black bathroom. Francis came to the house for a party after a tiring day at the studio." Francis asked the woman Can the owner use the bathroom, the next screen is a bathtub, and then you find her taking a shower. Then you pull back and you see this beautifully designed, perfectly symmetrical bathroom with the tub in the middle. Somehow it gives you a sense of stability, a sense that she's very sure of what she's doing. She was okay at the time, so he used composition to support that feeling. Generally speaking, that's how he makes sets. Can't even shoot in any other way. This is amazing. Siebelt eliminates a lot of guesswork and unproductive talk. He said: 'That's it, guys. ' And that's how you shoot it. Kovac's own contribution really starts when the dailies are ready in the early stages. The preparations for "Francis" have finally reached this point: Kovac feels he's got hold of Crayford and Siebelt's intention was enough to transform it into light and photographic form. He didn't say much, but said: "Okay, I get it. Now I'm going to show you how this will look on film." They had eight days of test shots, basically close-ups. Due to the variety of changes Francis goes through in the film, makeup and hairstyles had to be determined for the various stages of her life, and Kovacs also determined the corresponding lighting forms for these images. They took pictures and they did a film test, which turned out to be the most successful. The footage was cut from the working copy, printed as 8x10 photos, and pasted on a large board for the purpose of analyzing the structure of the film, then reproductions of these photos were used by makeup artists and hair stylists as references during filming . One thing Kovacs didn't fully realize until he saw the finished film. That is, to a certain extent the whole story can be shortened to these few features of Francis. Not only has her face undergone morphological changes, but Jessica Lange has progressed in her performance, while the tone of color and the texture and atmosphere of the image created by the lighting help convey the meaning of the film. The clearest example of this is, of course, the contrast between the glamorous lighting on the Hollywood stage and the lighting when she was in a mental hospital. For what he considered to be the golden age of Hollywood, Kovacs went straight to the golden tones for the lighting, and he also adopted some of the usual tricks of the era – soft images with hard-toned backlighting. Aside from having to use it as a light source in the shot, the Hollywood scene is the only place he uses backlighting. Kovacs used soft lighting for the middle school stage, which combined with the no-makeup look resulted in a very soft and pristine effect. He said it was easier to make Jessica Lange look younger than to make her look older. For example, the image of 'this is your life' at this stage is difficult to deal with. This was not even resolved before filming began. Numerous trials have been done on cosmetic products, but none have worked well. In the end, Kovacs concluded: The key is light. There was one point he was sensitively aware of during the shoot, and it was Jessica Lange's eyes. Kovacs feels that the eyes of any actor or actress are always the key to the plot. He noticed that Lange's eyes were always watery, prompting the audience to feel the repressed emotion she was trying to express. While thinking of trying to keep some light in her eyes, an idea came to him; When shooting the last scene, no eye light was given at all. The result is a wonderful addition to Lange's lobotomized woman. Compared to everything we've seen before, her eyes are now lifeless. In the scene where she talks to Harry and walks home, there is a long follow-up shot, and to achieve that, Kovacs uses a top light. The added bonus of doing this is that it creates a light shadow under the eyes while also accentuating her cheekbones, which when combined with a certain amount of makeup make her age convincingly. On the shoot for Fran Kovacs used the natural effect of venetian blinds to illuminate several of the scenes in which the Sith was sent to the asylum. He joked that he loved the feeling of being imprisoned by the shadow of the venetian blinds so much that he used it in Heartbeat. According to him, he has been waiting for someone to trouble him because of this. But he felt it worked well in "Francis." The film's first use of venetian shades is in the footage of Francis' first conversation with the nursing home doctor. The shadow doesn't actually fall on Francis' face in that shot, but it does fall across her face later in the film when she is admitted to a state hospital. In general, Kovac sees his lighting in "Francis" as representing a transitional phase for him, during which he was training himself to adopt a much simpler approach to lighting. He said: “If you don’t keep the lighting simple, it can be a very grueling experience. Now, after so many years in the business, I’ve come to realize that the simpler the better. I used to use a lot Lights, now my way is to have as few lights as possible to achieve the same effect. For me it's more real and much more believable, as long as you keep it simple. Shoot the court where she was sentenced to 180 days I only had three lights on for the shot. This courtroom was shot on set on the sixth or seventh floor of the St. Peder Building, so I couldn't have the lights out of the window. Kovacs also likes to use enough light that he can shoot interiors with an aperture of F-4. "I don't like low light because I think it actually destroys the quality of the image. You have to use large apertures and a small depth of field, which is nerve-racking, and if the actor's nose is pointed, his ears are out of focus. I can't stand that. I mean, don't know how this will work. "Just as Siebelt designed the color combinations of sets and costumes to enhance the film's dramatic structure, Kovacs controlled the color reproduction of the photography by adding gelatin filters to the lights and precise lighting. He also used color to illustrate shots, like the last shot of Francis' parents in the house. He said: "I went back to the golden hues of the past. My mother is getting old, but she still has that crazy dream, and I don't know why, but my gut tells me that this place should be made to feel warm—as it should be, but it isn't. Filming "Francis" was a relatively long and stressful experience. "It was emotionally draining, because you couldn't separate yourself from her intense performance," Kovacs said. come out. You are there, you are part of it, and you are emotionally drained. Can you imagine what it's like when she has to do it over and over again?" Kovac estimates that they take about 20 percent more raw film than was used to finish the film, a figure he says is normal. He also said that the script is still being revised during the filming process. There are about 96 sets and live-action sets in the film, and the hardest part of the filming is finding all the things you need in Seattle within a limited time. He said he likes to be involved in the development. Shooting planning, which ensures that as much time as possible is allocated to location work where complete control of weather and light is not possible. He feels it is important that cinematographers participate in the pre-planning of the film, he insists, really, really When it comes to rehearsals and actual shooting, there is a limit to what the cameraman and director can do, especially for a film that relies so heavily on the performance of the actors. Made intuitively on the spot. "I never like to go home and prepare like homework. Let's say we're shooting a new shot tomorrow morning. I know the whole story, and I know how that shot relates to the whole structure. A general idea for lighting, but I wouldn't sit down and start fiddling with some graphic design or something, because that might be irrelevant. The next morning, when I came to the set, when the director brought the actress After he came in, he said, ok, let's rehearse the scene. At this moment, all my plans are not abandoned. My opinion is, who can do any kind of graphic design like that, or even draw some schedules in their minds The picture. The only one who can really do that is the director. Even the director is very careful about it. You come home and you sit in a chair, it's just you and me, and a piece of paper. You exclude the actors, but you can't Do, because the actors will bring out the richness of color and detail that you never imagined when you were laying down on the table drawing a schedule." "Just as a face can have a thousand different emotions and expressions, so can you There are so many different ways to light a close-up. The choice of lighting is made on the spot when you see the scene. The importance of a good rehearsal is not only when you see the specific positioning and scheduling, but It's that you see where the emotional climax is. You feel the meaning, so you know what you have to give. That's when you really get the lighting. Usually you start by lighting a panoramic shot , today it's not as important as it used to be. A lot of directors now use what's called a master shot to let the actors figure out which direction they're going to shoot from, and a lot of times they just leave that out. , for creative people, is a good dramatic start. You create the whole mood, you identify where the light is coming from. Then once you start working on the scene further, it's possible to create an off-camera secondary light source. You Poetry can take unusual forms to create unique effects." One of the best examples of this type of on-set creative decision making is the scene in the film where Francis berates the director on set and storms out of the studio screaming. As soon as she pushed the door open, light streamed in from behind her, forming an image around her that seemed to be a reproduction of her mental state. Not only was the image not preconceived, it was born half of necessity, because the shot was shot at night. Kovacs assured Crayford that with some greenery and enough light reflecting off the white muslin, a photorealistic daytime exterior could be created. Crayford agreed to shoot as such, but Kovac could sense he wasn't quite satisfied. Then Crayford came to him again and asked him what was the idea of turning off the light on the door completely, so that nothing could be seen there but the light streaming in from the outside when the door was opened. Kovacs grabbed the idea, shot more light into the white muslin, and added a fog mirror to the lens to intensify the effect. Kovacs made two other films in the time between filming of "Francis" and seeing the finished version. He said he was never surprised by the way a film was edited. He believes that photographers who leave for a period of time after making a film and then come back, unlike directors and editors who have been working for several months, can look at certain problems in the editing process with fresh eyes. Aside from the inevitable cuts to shorten the film, one of the things that impressed him most about the "Francis" cut was the violence in the hospital ward and Francis' appeal before he was sentenced for release. Shots are cut together. Those images flashed through her mind as memories as Frances faced the verdict, to good effect, even though the two sets of shots were originally shot as separate shots. The film continued to be edited in the editing process until Kovacs returned to direct the lighting for the standard copy. Francis, in its finished state, is a prime example of how a film is an inseparable, integral product formed by the close cooperation of its various aspects of the creative staff. Every artist and craftsman tries his best to add his share to the efforts of his fellows, and the result is seen on the screen. art design A film's sets, locations, costumes, and props are admired by the audience, and an art designer is often admired for creating the right atmosphere for a film. But audiences hardly realize how many steps a design takes from conception to realization on the screen. Every designer has his or her own way of working. Richard Siebelt, the art designer of the film "Francis," said in describing his method of work: "Every time I make a film, I think of a piece of music: what is the instrument to play, is it a symphony or a concerto, Belongs to that era, is it classical or romantic. For me, "Frances" is a romantic piece, and its bizarre music contrasts strongly with 'opera clowns' like "Champo". When When I did "Chinatown," I was dealing with a brass concerto, a well-crafted piece. My "Knowledge of the Sensuality" was an absolute chamber music. I was reading "Francis" I realized when I was writing this book that it was a concerto played by very emotional stringed instruments: violin and cello. It was a story I had been looking for. It was about a girl who came home again and again. In the sonata form invented by Mozart, there is a form of 'restored (going home)', that is, A–B–A–C–D–A. Music starts from a certain motive and turns to another motive. Then back to the first motive (home), then to a different motive, then back to the original, and so on, and finally ending at the original motive (home). When Mozart couldn't achieve the reduction, he always added another Last epilogue. This story fits that perfectly. This girl started at 16 and went to Russia, New York, Hollywood, came home a star. She left home again, went to Hollywood and New York, and came home again in a mess The third time she left home was in a mental hospital and then came back home. In the original script, she ended up leaving home and went to a mental hospital and never came back. The ending here is that, eight years later, she served as the The host of the TV show 'This Is Your Life'." According to Sybalt, the 18-year-old story can be clearly divided into three movements: home (Seattle), Hollywood and finally the mental hospital. This is the basic structure of art design. Each movement has its own unique color combination and spatial relationship. As Sibalt describes it, "the four main interiors of Hollywood: The studio, the beach house, the ballroom and the lounge are all white, Spanish style, popular in the thirties, absorbing and reflecting the sun, looking hot, in contrast to Seattle where everything is brown and green in cool tones Quite the opposite.” The script originally called for the mother to be making stew in the opening shot, so Sybalt chose “stew colors”: brown, orange and green to represent “home.” As long as Francis was in Hollywood Or New York, anyway, the dominant color is always white. The color of the mental hospital is gray. That's the color structure of the film. Here's what Sybalt says: Interspersed, it means she can also see some 'home' shadows when she is in Hollywood or New York...like composing music, it means the same, can make something reappear in the middle...meet before and after something At some sign, for example, when she was late and left the set, there were certain gray shots. One of them was in a little Nazi film, and it was all in this color (gray), which is the color of the mental hospital that's going to appear, but you're not there yet. Whenever Harry shows up, everything is brown because Harry is there. "Shibalt is of course referring to the walls and trim in the scene, but that's also true of the costumes. In the shot where she's about to leave the lounge, she's wearing grey, but at the same time she's also wearing a brown one." Sweater. Sibelt firmly believes that establishing these three distinct parts makes the whole design "very clear, and very simple. Simple things like this work better, as long as you get the basics right, you can do everything with these simple things.” He also favors simple spatial manipulation. Although Farmer’s Seattle home, It looks crowded and messy, but many of them are simple and not complicated space scenes. He said: "I do a lot of designs like this. The wall at the stairwell where her mother came down to talk to her is an example. I like simple surfaces because that way you can see (prominently) the actors." It is the grasp of space, that is, what Sibalt calls "echoing". These are used to enhance the psychological appeal of the film and show Francis' mental state. According to the script requirements, the three powder rooms that appear in the film gradually become smaller. The first was in Hollywood and was a powder room with ensuite, flowers everywhere and beautiful equipment. It was, in his words, "a dressing room for a star, and it means success!" The second was in a small theater in Mount Kisco. She's given up her big, pretty Hollywood dressing room "for art." Here is a narrow house. The third dressing room was after she returned to Hollywood, and this one was half the size of the previous one. "Beyond this shrinking material scale, you can see that her life is going from bad to worse." There are also three main aisles in the film. The first is in Farmer's house, which is very cramped to give a feeling of being anxious, closed, restricted. The second is in the Odets flat, slightly wider and longer. The last one was in a mental hospital and was 150 feet long. Siebelt said he made heavy use of symmetry in his designs. "Especially in a film like 'Francis,' for the most part, Francis is always out of balance, so you have to find something to lean on, and it's completely symmetrical Yes. The bath scene is a good example. She's forced to go straight to a party that she doesn't want to go to. Once there, she immediately goes upstairs to take a shower. This shot means: 'Give me a Minutes, because I'm going crazy - I want to rest'." Another shot that is symmetrical to her mental state is when she comes out of his "office" with her father and goes down the stairs . She is happy because she has decided to give up Hollywood and be herself. "Echoes" occur when two different shots have similar properties. Such as the graphic design of her family's house and the Odets apartment. "The location of the kitchen, the fireplace, the living room, the living room, etc. is pretty much the same in both places," Siebert said. "That's how I used to show that she thought she'd found another home and a strong father. ." As Francis artist Ida Langdon pointed out, these designs don't have to be noticed by the audience, but because it's there, it's consciously arranged, so you're Create a subconscious feeling. Once the design purpose of any film has been determined and its structural form has been clarified, its image product is the drawing board of the art designer. Sibelt himself drew. "I started by drawing a 1/4 inch pattern and handed it over to my first assistant, the artist, who worked with the draftsman to draw it more completely. Even though all I gave them was a door, they It draws a wall.” Langdon says, “Then we draw the elevation and the floor plan, and then we start making it.” At this point, Sibalt starts picking colors and wallpaper, and so on. These are all his own hands. He said: "They showed me wooden models and I was like, 'Yeah, that's right,' or, 'No, that's wrong,' until I saw that it was all done right...and then I Find the setter and tell him exactly what the furniture in the set should look like, and he goes and brings the furniture in. We set them up, do some processing, maybe half of them are removed. There are Lots and lots of details, but it's the most basic. I'm responsible for everything that happens, and nothing happens that I don't know about." Langdon confirms this, saying that every step of the way she Ask him for advice..."It's great to work with Sybalt because he always tells you exactly what he wants and leaves you free to do it". Siebel also aged his own sets. When the set was built, he used the enamel to shape the surface. He said: "The study of texture is very interesting and very important, even though you can't see it. It's not meant to be seen, but it is there to bring realism and life to the set. In Odets The apartment is full of glazed, old-fashioned, dotted walls from the 1940s, so when you walk into the set, it feels like you were fifty years ago.” Most of the scenes in "Francis" were shot in the studio, even those she shot in Hollywood. In fact, most of the films starring Francis were shot in real locations. "That was really an option for me... I decided early on that all three of our films were going to show very clearly that what she did was untrue," Siebert said. What was done was to add to that sense of falsity . During the filming of the film, I was always looking for locations. "I knew exactly what I wanted, and we looked for it until we found it," said Siebert. As they searched for the exterior of Odets' apartment, he went out with the director and walked around, Looking at the various buildings..., he said, "I felt that the one on the west side of Central Park from the 1980s was just right." It turned out to be ideal. Oddly enough, a woman who lived in the house later told them that Crayford Odets had indeed lived in the house. According to Siebert, all exterior scenes were shot six months into the film. "First we wanted to figure out what was necessary, and second we needed a certain weather, and we waited. The Bilasco Theater, Central Park, and the Asylum -- a building on Long Island, was shot in New York. Then we flew to California and shot all the exterior shots of the motel, the Dutch New Yorker, and Mount Kisco in one night. The Seattle home was an uninhabited house so we could shoot backwards. We shot from her It started when the parents were old, and then we removed the bushes and put in a driveway...and it went from an abandoned state back to 1931." "There isn't much connection between the studio interiors and the actual exteriors in the film. . . . but the scene where Francis walks out of the house and later when her mother says 'don't go for a drink' was done with some sets added to it." But those outside scenes as she left her father's "office", It was all filmed in Seattle, although the office itself was actually in an old Los Angeles hotel, the Prince Edward Hotel. "This restaurant was built in 1903 and that lobby was exactly what I was looking for.... This lobby gave me this wonderful perspective, That is, to observe the man without an office from the top of the column. "The backdrop of the central park outside the window that brings realism to the Odets apartment was shot by Siebel for "Rosemary's Baby" in 1967. As Richard Siebert said, "I am not in What kind of video of the hardware family. I make films about the relationship between people and people. I'm interested in how you structure time and space, I use harmony and repetition. I am concerned with the general idea of design, that is, it is a set of relationships that make up a whole from parts. The film "Francis" is a good example where the design of the visual image structure has made a fruitful contribution to the film. However, this factor is usually not consciously recognized by the audience. It is like Langdon said. The "Right There" enriches the environment and enhances the emotional punch of the film. About photographer LASZLO KOVAC Kovacs is Hungarian, and from 1952 to 1956 he attended the Budapest Film School. He left his country for the United States during the Hungarian incident in 1956. After a period of hard life, he was finally recognized as a cinematographer in Hollywood with an international reputation. He said he was shocked to see "Citizen Kane" in Budapest in 1948, and later the film was not allowed to be released in Hungary. He always managed to find the film, which he studied as a textbook. Kovacs started out in the US as "films without cost". Here's what he said: At that time (referring to the early 1960s) a lot of low-budget, independent, non-union films were made. I've been involved in some of them. We don't care about money, but we need experience. So that period is a day of learning. I've made some films, and the whole crew was just me and Wilmes (another Budapest film school student who came to America with him). We have always called this kind of film 'no-budget film', not low-budget film. It was a very exciting time because we learned from our own mistakes. We have learned how to overcome the limitations we face. We try to use our talents to overcome the lack of cost. It was a fun and colorful day compared to today, but that atmosphere is gone. It's also sad to say, because there are many students from film schools and people from other fields who want to participate in film production, but they just don't have the opportunity to practice and learn from their own mistakes. What did Kovacs benefit from working on "no-budget films" and "low-budget films"? That's how Alonzo, Sigismund, Roizman and Willis -- all well-known international cinematographers -- all got their start, he said. Those low-budget films were epic to us. Those producers needed something that could get the images to the screen and work on time every day. Instead, we strive to exceed these requirements in order to improve ourselves. We tried to hire good people, and we formed a really engaged group. We are excited, excited about the making of the film. So each of our films is better than the last. Our costs are from $30,000 to $80,000. We shoot a film in ten or twelve days, and we don't actually have any equipment at all. If we shoot an interior, we rent a set of tungsten lights and plug it into a power source. Of course, we don't have any fill lights and no reflectors for any exterior shots. I once made a film and I only had four reflectors, and a set of key lights. that is all. The producer had an Allai with a muffler and three lenses. But I am very satisfied with it. I remember one time we rented a zoom lens and it was a big festival. It's a never-ending battle. The same is true today, only on another level. Even if you're making an eight million and ten million dollar movie, you're going to have the same mess. It's just a different scale. There is a transition period from "no-budget" to "low-budget" production. I met Richard Roche, and he needed to find someone he could afford, but at the same time produce quality stuff. This is my long-term relationship with a special director. Together we make better and bigger films. We broke a new frontier. Then suddenly a man appeared, and he was Peter Bogdanovich. He's also looking for someone he can afford. He also needed a cinematographer who could give something very special, very special. He didn't have much money, and the actor he hired Boris Karloff could only give him a limited number of days. We had an incredible experience with that film. We must use our talents to overcome the cost problem. Artist Polly Blatt can completely renovate a scene in a few hours. We work long hours, sometimes eighteen hours a day. So this film made me and Bogdanovich have a very long relationship. This is very important. "No-cost films", "low-budget films" are the best training places. This is crucial. Other qualifications are for later. It takes time to gain experience, and no one can teach you experience. If you don't have the experience, knowledge and perfect art, no one will hire you. But if you have all this, for example, I don't need to apply to unionize myself, and those producers will try to get me into the union because they use my talents. According to Kovacs, EASY RIDER, 1969) fundamentally changed the way films were made. The movement has long started, but it is a milestone. In the beginning, we had to shoot on location because we couldn't afford to rent a studio. We had to go outside to find real things and bring them to the screen, and that injected freshness and a new reality into the show. That's the beauty of "no-budget movies" and "low-budget movies" that force you to do extraordinary things. Technology has changed a lot now, but technically, the gains from that period still affect my work today. That era influenced our thinking and philosophy. When Kovacs talks about the relationship between technology and art, he says that optics, camera movement, composition and lighting are all very technical issues, but it points to a very important artistic issue: how do you use your tools. The question is how do you combine all these factors to bring what you want to say on the screen, and that's the difference. The choice of optical lens is extremely important. Because the choice of lens can change reality, it can change perspective, and even change the relationship of characters. The choice of optical lens must be closely related to the content of the play. It cannot be an arbitrary choice. Take "Paper Moon" as an example, it is both a black and white film and a film with a large depth of field. This means that everything in the composition, whether near or far, must be in focus. Kansas is not picturesque, it doesn't have beautiful mountains and valleys. It's as flat as a tabletop. It was a factor in the movie and I had to make it work. In the choice of lens, It's impossible for me to shoot close-ups with a wide-angle lens, especially a close-up of a little girl. What's more, the director also arranged background actions behind her close-up, and he asked for the same realism as her face. The wide-angle lens would distort her face, but it had depth. So the choice of lens is very important. "Just Got It" is the exact opposite. We experiment with telephoto and use that tricky focusing trick. The director asked for a very compressed space, shallow focus. He required only one actor to be in real focus, and not focus until the other actor spoke up. He doesn't have too many visual distractions at these moments. Some people criticize us for using that technique. But if film is an art form, then as filmmakers, we have an obligation to discover our tools and make the most of them. We are not just documenting a story. Cameras, optics, and composition are by their very nature the main ingredients of storytelling. As far as the main criterion for judging composition is good or bad, it's to see if it emotionally supports the scene. Composition is for that. You can achieve this with a balanced, symmetrical, or unbalanced, asymmetrical composition. There is no such thing as beauty in composition. Otherwise you are making another film. You and the director did not make the same film. An actor has to work very hard to capture characters and scenes, and you are the visual support for him. Regarding the issue of seats, that is not a hard and fast rule. That is a question of cooperation. The actor knows what the camera means, he works with the camera. So camera positions are automatically decided when you watch the actors perform in the scene. When I shoot anything, black and white or color, I always use the black and white method of lighting for depth and separation. Color tablets are easier to do this. Because black-and-white films have only intermediate gray levels from black to white. Sometimes the subjects are inseparable. Our problem in cinematography is really the problem of controlling color. I don't want to be a director. It's really good to be a director for self-satisfaction. But when you're making decisions like this in your life, you have to be very careful. First of all, I love the work I am doing so much. I made up my mind to be a cinematographer when I was eighteen; it seemed like a dream to me, and now it's come true. I enjoyed it so much, I didn't want to leave it out. Second, and more seriously, if you want to be a director, you have to be the best director. It's not enough to be a traffic director, everyone directs traffic. In our stall, the traffic command is a little bit more. If I'm going to be a director, I'm going to be the best director, but I don't think I can . Good directors have a lot of pain, like having a baby. So you can help him, give him some ideas, and if that idea works, you'll be very satisfied. I won't give up my current job, it's too valuable. Those moments were wonderful. The work chronology of the main creators Kovac's creation chronology: MARK OF THE GUN 1963 A MAN CALLED DAGGER 1964 HELL'S ANGELS ON WHEELS 1967 TARGETS (BOGDANOVICH) 1967 REBEL ROUSERS 1967 PSYCH-OUT 1968 THE SAVAGE SEVEN 1968 SINGLE ROOM FURNISHED 1968 BLOOD OF THE DRACULA'S CASTLE 1969 EASY RIDER 1969 THAT COLD DAY IN THE PARK 1969 GETTING STRAIGHT 1970 FIVE EASY PEICES 1970 ALEX IN WONDERLAND 1970 THE LAST MOVIE WOOLF? 1966 Who's Afraid of Vaugenia? " THE GRADUATE 1967 "The Graduate" ROSEMARY'S BABY 1968 "Rosemary's Baby" CATCH 22 1970 "Catch 22" CARNAL KNOWLEDGE 1971 "Knowledge of the flesh" CHINATOWN 1974 "Chinatown" THE FORTUNE 1975 PLAYERS 1979 PARTNERS 1982 *FRANCES 1982 "Frances" Director Crayford's Creation Chronology: THAT COLD DAY IN THE PARK 1968 Assistant Director*FIST 1978 Editor THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE 1981 Editor*FRANCES "Frances" 1982 director
View more about Frances reviews
