فصل الميزانسين ،الفراغ الجغرافي(المقاطعات الفراغية)والانماط التجاورية ٣-a.فهم السينما

Anthropologist Edward T. Hall in his studies of hidden dimensions and the silent language. Hull discovered that juxtapositional patterns i.e. the relationship between two creatures within a known space can be affected by external considerations. The intensity of noise and the degree of illumination can all change the space between individuals. People were in civilizations
The Anglo-Saxons and Northern Europeans tended to use more space than people in warmer climates. Too much noise, danger, and darkness tend to draw people close together. After taking these cultural and external differences into account, Hull divides the ways in which people use space into four major juxtapositional patterns: the intimate, the personal, the social, and the public, and he calls them spaces.

Hull defines intimate distance as the distance from actual skin-to-skin contact to 18 knots away. This is the physical bonding distance of love, comfort and tenderness between individuals. Such distances are considered intrusive with strangers. Most people will react with suspicion and hostility if a stranger invades their private space, and this intimate distance is considered in many civilizations to be unsuitable for them. and defective in public.

The personal distance ranges from approximately one and a half to four feet from the person and individuals can touch each other if necessary as long as they are within an arm's length of each other. These distances are reserved for friends and acquaintances more than for lovers or members of the same family. Personal distances maintain privacy between individuals. However, these ranges do not necessarily suggest expulsion or expulsion, as intimate distances almost always suggest.

With social distances, it extends from four feet to approximately 12 feet. These spaces are usually intended for impersonal business and casual social gatherings. It is the extent of friendship in most cases, but it is more an expression of formality than personal distance. In normal circumstances, social distances are necessary when there are more than three members of a group. In some cases, maintaining an intimate or personal distance between two individuals is considered a matter of preference within social situations. Such behavior may be interpreted as abnormal or very private.

Hull interprets the "general" distance as extending from twelve feet to twenty-five feet or more. These ranges are usually formal and often neutral discrete. Showing feelings is generally considered in these areas to be in bad taste. VIPs are usually seen in public venues and because of the large amount of space involved in these venues, people generally exaggerate their gestures and raise their voices in order to be understood clearly.

Egypt All these models and models of proximity are approximate, and Hull confirms their difference from one civilization to another, for what is considered a personal distance in Algeria is likely to be considered an intimate distance in Sweden or England. In addition, most people instinctively adapt to adjacent styles. We don't tell ourselves this person has invaded our intimate space when some stranger happens to be standing by It's about eighteen knots away from us but unless we're in a combat atmosphere we're likely to automatically pull away in such circumstances. Obviously, the social context is also a critical factor in the adjacent models. For example, when we are in a crowded underground vehicle, almost everyone. Within the intimate range, however, we maintain a 'general' attitude, as we do not speak to the person whose body is literally touching ours.

Juxtapositional models are obvious to anyone who has paid attention to the way people obey certain spatial conventions in practical life. But in cinema, these models are applied to shots and their dimensions. Although the snapshot is not necessarily defined by the literal space between the camera and the photographed object, we find that in terms of its psychological effect, it suggests physical distances (politicians who appear on television are often enemies of themselves because they are unable to adapt to different juxtapositional models. Old politicians appear on The television screen is condescending because they are used to speaking to huge audiences that are within the public contiguous spheres.While the television camera approaches the personal sphere, the grand gestures and loud voices of these politicians may sound rhetorical and insincere even to viewers who sympathize with that politician.On the other hand The young politicians are more aware of the different influences of the different neighbourhoods, so their appearances in political seminars on television appear smoother, more refined and more honest even to their opponents. usually

The shot In front of the film director is usually a number. of choices about what type to use to communicate the dramatic action of the scene. The one who decides to choose this - bearing in mind that this is usually done instinctively and unconsciously - is the emotional or mental impact of the different neighboring areas. Each adjacency model has an approximate snapshot equal to it. Intimate distance, for example, can be similar to the extent of a shot Large or very large, and the personal distance is almost similar to the range of the average shot. The social distances correspond to the ranges of the medium shot and the full shot. Public distances are approximately within the ranges of the far and very long shot. And since our eyes are associated with the lens of the camera, we actually fall within the different ranges of interviewing the subject matter. When we are presented with a large shot of a character, for example, we feel as if we are in an intimate relationship with the character. In some cases, this method makes us adhere to it and forces us to take care of it and take its problems away from it. If the character is the character of the villain, then the big shot causes an emotional rejection in us, as he, in fact, invades our space. Director Sergio Leone uses this technique effectively in many of his big shots of villains in Once Upon a Time in the West.

In general, the greater the distance between the camera and the subject, the more we remain emotionally neutral, as this general adjacent range tends to encourage us to have a certain mental independence. And when we are so close to the action—of a person sliding on a banana peel, for example—the action is rarely funny and we are concerned for the person's safety. If we look at the same event from a greater distance, it affects us comically. It is for this very reason that Charlie Chaplin used big shots sparingly. And when Charlie stays in the distant shots, we enjoy his funny trivia and predicaments. But in the scenes with great emotional momentum, where we see Chaplin in big shots, these big shots have a violent effect on the audience, as we suddenly realize that the situation we laughed at is no longer funny. We feel closer to Charlie and embrace his feelings.

The choice of shot is usually decided by certain practical considerations. The director usually chooses the shot that best expresses the dramatic action of the scene. If there is a contradiction between the emotional impact of some adjacent ranges and the required clarity

To communicate what is going on to the viewer, most directors will opt for clarity and obtain emotional impact by other means. Director Jean-Luc Coudard did this in a scene from The Weekend where he sacrifices functionality for form and always results in confusion on the part of the audience. For much of the film, Kodar keeps his villainous protagonists in long shots to prevent the audience from seeing any of them. Even the scenes of debauchery are carried out to such extents, and the result is that the brutal facts often strike us as comical and funny - and this is the self-identification of May.

Kodar's intended goal, however, is that in one of the scenes we find the exchange of prisoners in a field field in the countryside. And the action is performed with a very long shot and without cutting, so we cannot identify the prisoners because of the distance between the camera and the characters. Because of Kodar's unwillingness to provide a larger shot to clarify the situation, he maintains a certain sense of mental distance, but unfortunately he also transcends the familiar and basic principle of clarity, with the result that the scene loses its impact.

However, there are many situations in which the choice of shot is not necessarily determined by such functional considerations. If a scene requires, for example, a shot of a man looking at a table alone, the director has a number of choices that he can prefer and choose one of which is likely to be decided at least in part of it in the light of juxtapositional considerations (2-25).

A typical functional director such as Howard Hawks would likely shoot the scene in a medium shot showing the man's upper body and table top. A comedic realist like Charlie Chaplin might have used a full or long shot to prevent the audience from identifying himself too much with the character and to allow us to see his social background. A director like Hitchcock dominates his impressionistic works. He usually wants the audience to identify with the hero, and he might give us a number of big shots of the man's face. and the things on the table to confirm the particular emotional chain of thoughts. Perhaps the scene was filmed by a director like Antonioni in a very distant shot to suggest the loneliness of the man and his alienation. Thus, as in almost every other cinematic style, it is the dramatic context that decides the selection of the shot and the selection of the juxtapositional effects inherent to it.