فصل الدراما ، الممثل ٤-a .. كتاب فهم السينما

Reality As Hitchcock noted, faces do not necessarily reveal what people are feeling and thinking. For various reasons, Hitchcock preferred to communicate these ideas and feelings through the montages (7-19).

The view of the scene is a dining table. The heroine looks at her husband (A), who is eating as usual (B). Then a close-up shows us a bowl containing meat and fruits, next to it is a knife and fork (C), we see the wife's hands behind the bowl. Hitchcock then cuts to a medium shot of the wife pensively cutting some meat which is (d). Then a medium shot of her brother's empty chair (H). Large shot of wife's hands holding knife and fork (f). A large shot of a cage in which canaries remind the heroine of her dead brother (Z). A close-up of the contemplating wife's face (H). A large shot of the bowl and knife (I). Suddenly, a large shot of the skeptical husband's face (J). He notices the relationship between the knife and her pensive expression, as the camera turns horizontally and does not cut back to the knife. (K) gets up to its side. Hitchcock quickly cuts to a large shot of her hand reaching for the knife (L). Cut into a very large shot of the knife entering his body (M). Cut to a double shot of his face, his face shrinking in pain and her face in fear (N). Cut to a medium shot in which his dead body falls outside the frame (S).

She said that one of the recurring themes in Hitchcock's films is the idea of ​​participating in crime. He forces the audience to participate in the behavior of his heroes through the diagnostic pairing of the audience with the hero. The result is that we share responsibility for certain specific actions because of this pairing in the movie (sabotage). We must excuse the heroine for her killing in some way because we contribute to it. The director forces us to this diagnosis and association by fragmenting the scene at the dinner table. We, like the heroine, make the connection between the knife, the murdered brother, and the guilty husband. And the knife seems to be gradually acquiring a will of its own, a kind of destiny. And before the heroine realizes what is happening, the knife is in the husband's body, as if she is doomed to find her resting place there. The revenge is perfect, and yet we do not really blame the tired wife, since we did help her in the act. When Miss Sydney saw the complete production, she was delighted with the results and marveled at Hitchcock's ingenuity.

The whole scene, of course, required little acting in the traditional sense. However, it is difficult to design a lot about the cinematic representation because the directors do not deal with every film with the same attitudes. In some films they may use realistic techniques often, and in other films impressionistic techniques. In the movie (The Rope), for example, Hitchcock does not include produced scenes in his film, as the director Many times he was experimenting with shooting sessions of ten minutes to keep real time. In Psycho, on the other hand, we find that the most influential scenes are fragmentation. Two men like Elia Kazan and Ankmar Berkman, two prominent theater directors in addition to being filmmakers, change their techniques a lot depending on the dramatic needs of the film, and there is no “correct” treatment of the cinematic scene. A director like Berkman may communicate a specific idea through acting, while Carl Dreyer may address the same idea through montage or composition. Every copy can be effective, whatever bears fruit is true.

However, whether the director is a realist or an impressionist, the differences between cinematic representation and theatrical representation remain essential. For example, the movie actor does not comply with the audio requirements as long as the volume of the sound is electronically controlled. Marilyn Monroe's breathy voice did not reach beyond the first rows in the theater, but in the cinema it was good to communicate the childish vulnerability that bestowed on her acting a poetic delicacy. Some film actors are popular for the same reason that makes his voice strangely charming. The richness that characterizes James Stewart, for example, is an essential aspect of the rustic, unassuming personality. Since film acting does not depend entirely on vocal flexibility, many actors have succeeded despite his rough and inexpressive voice. For example, Carrie Cooper, John Wayne, and Gregory Peck. she

Even the quality of a movie actor's voice can be electronically controlled. Music and sound effects can completely change the meaning of lines of dialogue. Audio through electronic innovations can sound choppy, resonant, or empty. In fact, Antonioni claims that the language in the film is an abstract sound in the first place and a meaningful dialogue in the second. As long as the dialogue in the cinema can be recorded, the director can re-record the lines until they are integrated (7-20). Sometimes he has to choose a word or two from a recorded course and then associate them with other words.