An Analysis Of A Gangster FIlm Scene..

             Welcome back! Yet again, it is about that time where we get to learn a little more about the gangster film genre. This time, we are going to choose a specific scene from one of our favorite gangster films and provide an in depth analysis. Lets get gangster with it…

             We will be using the mise-en-scene elements to analyze this scene because it will provide us with the greatest amount of understanding in such a short post. Let’s begin.

            Costume, lighting, performance and movement, and staging are the components of mise-en-scene we will use to analyze the scene. Our scene that we are analyzing is from Scarface directed by Brian De Palma. In this scene, our anti-hero is Tony Montana a cocaine kingpin, and he is drunk, sitting at his table in a restaurant, and has just had his wife throw her drink in his face and run out.

            The costumes that the actors are wearing are appropriate, Tony has a tuxedo on, and most people are dressed the same, or in a suit. De Palma tried to make these costume as close to what real people would be wearing in a high society up-scale restaurant, and he did well.

            The lighting seems to be a frontal lighting system from the lack of shadows in the frame, but there is also lighting from the chandeliers, candles, and wall lights. This lighting makes the scene look very open and still because everyone is sitting in the restaurant.

             The movement in the scene is really only our main character and the camera. Tony begins in his chair, and the camera is slowly panning to the right in a circular motion. Then he drunkenly stands up and stumbles as he yells obscenities at nobody and everybody in the restaurant. As he stands and very slowly stumbles toward the exit, the camera keeps panning around the table so we can see everyone reactions to him yelling. He finally reaches his mark and stays in the relatively same area, and the camera slowly starts coming in as he slowly walks backward toward the exit, preaching to everyone as he goes.

            The performance by Al Pacino is really exceptional as he plays an angry drunk cocaine addict who has everything material he could want in life. Perceived realism that he is drunk is all there, expressions are spot on, the only critique is that his body seems a bit stiff for a person in his condition.

            Our last element is the staging. De Palma does a good job with the positioning of people and props in the scene. The focus is always on Tony as he is always in the center of the frame and is one of the few who are standing besides the waiters and Tony’s entourage in the deep space. The shot is a long take without cuts, so the fact that the space in the frame is balanced through out is a credit to De Palma.

            Overall, the scene is very well put together as Tony does his monologue. Hopefully this was able to provide a clear analysis of the mise-en-scene in this scene. As this will be the last post for Gangster’s Paradise I guess there is only one thing to say..

“Say goodnight to the bad guy, the last time your ever gonna see a bad guy like this again” – Tony Montana

A Tribute To The Greats In The Gangster FIlm Genre..

           Welcome again to Gangster’s Paradise! We are giving tribute to the filmmakers who have produced works within the gangster film genre.

            Gangsters, within the entirety of this post we are saluting the filmmakers who have given us countless films to enjoy time and time again. Within the genre, there have been a few filmmakers within the last fifty years who have time after time created gangster films that are a credit to the film industry and the genre of gangster films alike. Respectively, these filmmakers are: Martin Scorsese, Brian De Palma and Francis Ford Coppola.

            Martin Scorsese is a filmmaking giant. Graduating from NYU as a film major, its safe to say he got his monies worth out of that investment. Scorsese does films from all kinds of genres, but obviously the one we are concerned with is his gangster films. Under his belt, he has directed the following: Mean Streets (1973), Goodfellas (1990), Casino (1995), Gangs of New York (2002), and most recently, The Departed (2006). According to the International Movie Database, Scorsese has won 83 awards over this career. Hailing from Queens, New York, he has become one of the premier directors in the film industry. He works frequently with actors Robert DeNiro, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Joe Pesi A fun fact about Martin is that he is one of fifty people banned from entering Tibet after a deal went sour with Disney and Chinese officials (Scorsese – IMDb, n.d.).

            Brian De Palma is another filmmaker that produces films in many genres; along with his gangster films he has produced films like the horror film Carrie (1976). De Palma’s gangster film genre filmography is as follows: Scarface (1983), The Untouchables (1987), and Carlito’s Way (1993). Actors that he frequently casts include Robert De Niro, John Lithgow, Al Pacino, and Sean Penn. A fun fact about De Palma is that as a fan of Bruce Springsteen, he directed his “Dancing In The Dark” music video (De Palma – IMDb, n.d.).

            Francis Ford Coppola is renowned for co-writing and directing the first installment of The Godfather (1972) trilogy, which is one of the highest grossing films of all time. Coppola graduated college with a degree in drama, and did graduate work at UCLA for filmmaking. His gangster film filmography is limited to The Godfather (1972), The Godfather: Part II (1974), and The Godfather: Part III (1990). Although his gangster film genre work is limited only to The Godfather trilogy, he was the man who made it happen and that is why we are saluting him (Coppola – IMDb, n.d.).  

            Here is to the men who created all the great films in the gangster film genre. Furthermore, the films that these men created are some of the great films of any genre, well, maybe not The Godfather: Part III, but we forgive Coppola for that one…

Keep on the lookout for the next Gangster’s Paradise post.

"Francis Ford Coppola - IMDb."The Internet Movie Database (IMDb). N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2011. <http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000338/#Director>

"Brian De Palma - IMDb."The Internet Movie Database (IMDb). N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2011. < http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000361/>

"Martin Scorsese - IMDb."The Internet Movie Database (IMDb). N.p., n.d. Web. 25 Apr. 2011. < http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000217/>

A Look at Music & Sound, And The Use Of Opera in Francis Ford Coppola's The Godfather...

            Welcome back gangster films lovers to Gangster’s Paradise! We are dedicating this post to music and scores, and The Godfather. As you read, click right here for some relaxing reading music.

            The music that is used in films might be the most underestimated and important component in the production of the film as a whole. The music score of a film plays a largeer role than just complimenting what is happening on screen. In some way, it seems that the combination of images and sounds connects with our inner perception. In this installment of Gangster’s Paradise we are going to look at the role of sound and music in films, then we will discuss Francis Ford Coppola and his use of Opera in The Godfather Trilogy (Bordwell & Thompson, 2010).

            Again, sound and music in film is an important underestimated element within film. Sound and music, when coupled with visual images, can influence how we understand those images and provide us with cues so we anticipate plot events, such as a creaky floor or door in a scary movie. Furthermore, it can also command our attention to a specific element on the screen. For example, if the Mitch Ryder song “Devil With a Blue Dress” came on a hypothetical film characters radio, while simultaneously a beautiful women in a blue dress was crossing the street, you are going to be inclined to follow her as she leaves the frame (Bordwell & Thompson, 2010).

            Within The Godfather by Francis Ford Coppola, according to Helen Roulston (1998), Italian composer Nino Rota and Carmine Coppola (Francis’s Father) wrote the scores for The Godfather from the operas of Giuseppe Verdi. Furthermore, she also states that there is no gangster film other than The Godfather that opera has such a prominent presence. To illustrate how he uses the opera in the films, during the wedding scene of Connie Corleone, Coppola used a famous aria (a solo vocal piece with instrumental accompaniment) from Mozart’s Le Nozze di Figaro (the Marriage of Figaro), the lyrics of which foreshadows (I no longer know what I am, what I do/ Now I’m all fire, now all ice /every woman makes my heart beat faster) the caviler attitude towards women that Santino “Sonny” Corleone, the godfather’s son and underboss, and Connie’s newly wed husband will soon adopt. Coppola exceptionally and creatively employs the use of opera in the films through out the trilogy. A creative way that Coppola integrated the opera into these films is in The Godfather III, when Michael Corleone’s son Anthony does not want to be involved in the family business. He studies and performs opera instead (Roulston, 1998, p. 99-111).

            As we close, the sound and music of a film plays a larger role than just complimenting what is happening on screen because, it evokes emotions that are reinforced by the visual images in the films. This is translated into The Godfather trilogy because of the sense of familiarity and nostalgia that the opera evokes along with the overall “old world” visual feel of the three films.

Bordwell, D., & Thompson, K. (2010). Sound in the Cinema. Film art: an introduction(9th ed., pp. 269). Boston: McGraw Hill.

Roulston, H. (1998). Opera in Gangster Movies: From Capone at Coppola. Journal of Popular Culture, 32(1), 99-111. Retrieved April 20, 2011, from the Academic Search Premier database.

            

An informative discussion on Shots & Editing Using Gangster Film Examples...

           Welcome! If you have been following this blog then you may already know, but for you newcomers, were living in Gangster’s Paradise! We have shots and editing up to bat right now and sound/ score/ music on deck. Play Ball!

            Shots and editing are essential to the overall look, feel, and style of a film. Essential to one another, the shots that the director takes are the pieces that the editor will later put together to make it a finished film product. To be able to fully comprehend the interconnected relationship that the shots in a film and the following editing process have on the outcome of the overall look, feel, and style of a film, we will split the two up.

            To discuss the shot, we can actually retreat to a previous post within this blog covering mise-en-scene. To reiterate, mise-en-scene is a term used in cinema to describe everything that is placed in the frame of the shot. Setting, costume and makeup, lighting, performance, and staging are the components that make up the content within the frame of the shot. Time is also a component within the shot (and mise-en-scene) because the director controls when we see things (Bordwell & Thompson, 2010, p. 120).

            Also, the cinematography controls how the shot is filmed. The photographic aspects of the shot, the framing of the shot, and the duration of the shot are the components that comprise cinematography. The photographic aspects involve how the film looks on the screen. For example, adding a colored film on the lens will cause the projected picture to be colored as well. The frame is described as the vantage point onto the material within the image, and duration is the actual time length of the shot (Bordwell & Thompson, 2010, p. 167-215).  .

           

            Moving on, editing is the coordination of one shot with the next. To keep this post relatively short, we will discuss only two ideas out of the many that editing involves. We will discuss editing how determines the pace of a film, and one of the four dimensions of film editing.

            Editing determines the pace of a film in three different ways. The duration of the shot, deciding what goes in or out of a sequence, and the type of transition between shots, all determine the speed that events move with. (Winokur & Holsinger, 2001)

            Next, we have the four dimensions of film editing. They are: graphic relations between shots, rhythmic relations between shots, spatial relations between shots, and temporal relations between shots respectively (Bordwell & Thompson, 2010, p. 223-229). Other than explaining every one of them, and being overwhelmed with information, we will choose one (Rhythmic Relations) and make it crystal clear.

            As Nichols used it, if the editor adjusts the lengths of shots in relation to one another, he is controlling the rhythm of the scene. For example, if two characters are in a conversation, the editor may cut on every line to show the character that’s talking. The editor is using the rhythm of the dialogue, to control the rhythm of the scene. This can be exemplified by looking at a scene that was previously discussed in the mise-en-scene post. (The link is here: What’s funny? The conversation starts at 1:00-2:15) The scene is from Martin Scorsese’s Goodfellas, with our two main characters getting into a tiff over a joke, which turns into a joke. On the other hand, if they cut only a few times during the conversation, then the editor is letting the dramatic progress of the scene to control the rhythm. (1976)

           

            The process of creating the shot, and the editing process are completely interdependent. Together shots and editing are what makes a film, a film. Editors have to pay attention to the mise-en-scene through out the duration of filming so they do not accidentally have something out of place from one shot to the next, and the directors often oversee or provide input into the editing process because of his/her knowledge of the shots.

            To conclude, Shots and editing are essential to the overall look, feel, style, and form of a film. Join us right back here at Gangsters Paradise when we discuss the sound/ score/ music of the gangster film genre.

Bordwell, D., & Thompson, K. (2010). Film Art: An Introduction (9th ed., p. 118-225). Boston: McGraw Hill.

Nichols, B. (1976). The Long Take by Brian Henderson. Movies and methods: an anthology. (p. 319). Berkeley: University of California press.

Winokur, M., & Holsinger, B. W. (2001). The complete Idiot's Guide to Movies, Flicks, and Film. Indianapolis, IN: Alpha Books.

The Narrative Function of Mise-en-Scene Explained using the Gangster Film Genre..

            Gangster’s Paradise is back, and happy that you are too. We left off by promising to discuss mise-en-scene, and Gangster’s Paradise keeps promises. Now lets get started..

            Mise-en-scene is a French term used in cinema to describe everything that is placed in front of the camera. Setting, costume and makeup, lighting, performance, and staging are components of mise-en-scene. Essentially, when combined, all the components together encompass what mise-en-scene is. Furthermore, manipulating any of the declared components creates a different mise-en-scene than before. Therefore, it can be useful to think of these components as tools that the director can employ. Most memorable aspects of a film are a result of mise-en-scene, and this is not just random occurrence. Directors often make use of storyboards as a way to control and plan mise-en-scene because it holds so much power to affect the overall feeling and perception of a film. The power over the film that mise-en-scene has can be referred to as the narrative function of mise-en-scene (Bordwell & Thompson, 2010).

            By taking what we know as the components or tools of mise-en-scene, stepping back and looking at them as a whole, we see that the mise-en-scene can be an effective narrator for a film. Lets look at this idea closer in an example. There is a scene in GoodFellas, where our main character Henry is at a bar with some of his associates. The director of the film, Martin Scorsese, employs the ability of mise-en-sense to function as a narrative in the following ways. Scorsese uses the staging tool of mise-en-sense to position the important characters, Tommy and Henry, in the middle of the frame in both shots he cuts back and forth to. But he goes further to place extras on either side of the camera to frame the characters to draw the attention of the audience letting them know that Tommy and Henry are the central characters without having to say it. Moreover, by placing bottles of alcohol on the table, having all the actors hold a glass, and having Henry smoking a cigarette creates a scene that tells us that these men are in a leisurely setting. These examples of how mise-en-sense can have narrative function are within single scenes, however mise-en-scene can also have a narrative function across the entire film.

            

             We can demonstrate this narrative function of mise-en-scene across the entire film with an example from Once Upon a Time in America, directed by Sergio Leone. This film mainly follows a single character from adolescence to old age. As an adolescent, our character “Noodles” and his gang get a locker at a train station to store their cash. Through out the film, as year pass, the director returns to the locker at the train station several times. Every time we return to the locker, the surroundings change but the lockers never do.

           

            As we close, remember that mise-en-scene has considerable power over a film. Also, remember that manipulating any of the components of mise-en-scene creates a different mise-en-scene that affect the ability of it to be recalled.

            Look for the next post from Gangsters Paradise where we will discuss shots and editing.

Bordwell, D., & Thompson, K. (2010). The Shot: Mise-en-Scene. Film art: an introduction(9th ed., pp. 118-163). New York: McGraw Hill.

            

Gender and the gangster film genre..

           Welcome back! Just as a reminder, Gangsters Paradise is the place to find an in depth analytical view of everyone’s favorite gangster films. Within this section, we are deliberating about gender in the gangster film genre. Let’s begin!

            Gender, and more specifically the differing perceptions of men and women in society and the media, has become a topic of interest for scholars in past years as well as the present. To begin, the embodiment of power in the social presence of men is translated into, and exemplified in the gangster film genre (Berger, 1977). Films in the genre are particularly focused on the interests of men. Power is one of, and the most prominent, interest that the genre continually reiterates. An example includes the film American Gangster (2007) where our protagonist, Frank Lucas, continually defends his top position in the heroin market by slaying rival kingpins, which begins as a business tactic, but habitually turns personal. Films in this genre constantly focus on men’s position in a power hierarchy, and rarely portray women in positions of power.

           

            Women are rarely shown in positions of power in the genre because historically within society, they were perceived to be ill equipped to perform in positions generally dominated by males. Although times have changed, there are still areas in society that women struggle to gain equality. John Berger explains the social injustice of women in an article titled Ways of Seeing (1977) by saying, “To be born a woman has been to be born, within an allotted and confined space, into the keeping of men.” (p. 46) Which is not to be taken in the sense of slavery of course, but this identifies how, generally speaking, women are objectified within society. This objectification of women is transmitted through society into the gangster film genre, which only reinforces it as the status quo.

             The objectification of women in society is best described by using the examples of magazines, commercials, advertisements, and films where women and their bodies are used as objects to sell. However, within this film genre, we can pull an example from a film to further illustrate the point. In the film Scarface (1983), Tony Montana, is an ambitious Cuban immigrant dedicated to becoming the largest cocaine distributor in the context of the film. When he first starts out and hooks up with a large distributor named Frank, he envies Frank for everything he has, his cars, his money, and also his wife. By the end of the film, Tony kills Frank and marries his wife. To Tony, Frank’s wife was the last object he could acquire before he could solidify his position on top.

Tony Montana with wife Elvira, ex-wife of Tony's late boss

            Times are changing, and women are becoming involved in every aspect of society more than ever. This post is meant to shed light on the topic of gender within society and also the gangster film genre.

            When Gangster’s Paradise returns for another discussion within the gangster film genre, the topic will be the narrative function of mise-en-sense.

Berger, J. (1977) Ways of Seeing. British Broadcasting Corporation: London. 45-64.

Semiotics of the Gangster Film Genre...

            What’s up gangsters? Welcome back to yet another edition of Gangsters Paradise! In this post we are covering semiotics, so why are we wasting any time?

            Semiotics is the analytical study of signs and the social production of meaning. Semiotics can be defined as the analysis of anything that represents and provides meaning for something else. As Em Griffin (2009) explains, signs sometimes carry “ideological baggage” or connotations with them wherever they go. A quick example of this idea would be the image of a red octagon. Obviously, a stop sign should come to mind, along with the feeling of stopping. This idea that a red octagon is immediately associated with a stop sign and evokes a stopping feeling is considered a socially constructed meaning for the trio because society has designated that shape and color combination as the signifier to the meaning that we have to stop when we arrive at one of these (the signified). The signifier is the physical form, or in this case the object, that we associate with the signified, which is the associated meaning, in this case, stopping. The signifier and the signified are “in each other's pocket” per se, meaning that they are indissoluble linked together and united, they make up the sign (Griffin, 2009).

            In this film communication criticism, we can utilize semiotics to analyze how the gangster film genre reinforces meanings from existing ideology in American society. One of these meanings from society that get reinforced by the gangster film genre quite often is the pursuit of the American dream. The American dream was a success story of becoming wealthy, influential, and having everything you need by working hard, and taking risks. These rags to riches stories have been disseminated through out the public over time, and have been absorbed into the American culture. Along with our culture, it has been absorbed into our films. Great examples of the American dream being depicted in gangster films are: Once Upon a Time in America (1984) and The Godfather part II (1974). Before we continue any further, there is something that needs to be addressed. These films illustrate poor immigrants who did what was necessary to survive in the ghettos (Once Upon a Time in America), and what was necessary to put food on the table for their families (The Godfather part II). That being said, we can use these gangster films to continue our semiotic analysis using a component of the American dream as the sign and breaking down the sign into its two components, the signifier and the signified.

Depiction of young Once Upon a Time in America characters 

            The component of the American dream that we will be breaking into parts and analyzing as the sign is: the main characters in the genre films who explicitly become wealthy. The signifier, for this sign, is the way the characters go about obtaining their wealth. In this genre, the way the characters go about developing and obtaining their wealth is usually through violence, drug distribution, and/or robbery. Next, the signified, or associated meaning related to the sign, is that America’s very existence makes opportunities available for the characters in the gangster film to obtain the wealth. If we unite these concepts together, we can paint a clearer picture of the whole.

Depiction of Once Upon a Time in America characters grown and wealthy

            As you may have guessed, becoming wealthy is not the only aspect of the American dream, nor is it the most important. Within the gangster film genre however, if we asked some of the characters from the films, they would surely say otherwise. The signifier for this sign is essentially how the characters physically make their money, and the signified aspect is the fact that America, being a democracy and the land of opportunity, provides the characters in the gangster films with the capability to obtain the wealth that they did. Combined, the signifier and the signified create the sign that we see in gangster films. This ties back into what was discussed previously about the gangster film genre reinforcing meanings from socially constructed ideologies, namely, the American dream. The gangster film genre reinforces the idea of the American dream, and the socially constructed meanings that are considered “ideological baggage” because of the explicit correlation that characters physically making money in America, and becoming wealthy by working hard and taking risks has with the socially developed concept of the American dream. All this meaning resonates when we watch gangster films and observe these characters that participate in the stated analysis. 

             Next time, we will be discussing gender in the gangster film genre. Until next time folks, keep your heads up.

Griffin, E. (2009). Chapter 25: Semiotics of Roland Barthes. A First Look at Communication Theory (7th ed., pp. 323-325). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Companies Inc.