Please Log in to Vote.

6 out of 6 members found this useful.

My Cinematic Structuralism Emancipation

Posted October 26th, 2009 by markallankaplan in Media

As I reflected on the importance of structuralism within Integral Theory (Wilber, Excerpt D), I remembered one of my first encounters with cinematic structuralism and how it had a profoundly emancipating effect on both my personal and professional life. 
 
It was my third year at USC School of Cinematic Arts, and my very first class in cinematic expression. The teacher, famed animator, special effects artist, and IMAX pioneer Lester Novros, came into the crowded classroom and walked up to the blackboard. A hush fell over the room as Lester drew a rectangle on the board and then turned to look at the class. He paused for a moment and then dramatically told us that the rectangle on the board represented the motion picture frame, and that every element within that frame had the power to affect the viewer’s body, heart, mind, and spirit. With a twinkle in his eyes, he promised that he would teach us the rules/structures governing these elements of expression. My perception of myself, the cinema, and the world profoundly shifted as I sat in the back of that classroom and listened to Lester explain how the expressive elements of space, line, shape, tone, color, movement, rhythm, and contrast and affinity, influence the physiological (UR), psychological (UL), cultural (LL), and social/environmental (LR) experience of the cinematic audience.
 
For example, in the opening of the first Star Wars (1977) we see a relatively large spaceship fly across the screen. Suddenly, another spaceship appears in hot pursuit of the first ship. As the hull of this pursuit spaceship progressively enters the frame for an extended period of time, the viewer is surrounded by a deep rumbling sound that moves from the back of the theater to the front. This amalgamation of the visually expressive elements of open space (the ship extending beyond the edges of the frame), spatial contrast (difference in size between the two ships), and movement (the relative movement of the two ships), combines with the spatially-moving depth-representational sounds to produce a powerful synchronization of the senses that replicates the experience of actually sitting under this massive ship. In an instant filmmaker George Lucas stylistically and viscerally communicates a deep archetypal message to the viewer, the message that we are about to see an epic struggle against a great and mighty force.
 
When that first class was over, I walked out onto the quad (yes, quadrants are everywhere!) and everything within and around me seemed different. I noticed the bright sunlight streaming through the trees, the patchwork patterns of bright green lawns between winding pathways, and the feelings I was having in the midst of this spatial reality.

Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

So Cool!

Posted October 27th, 2009 by Brendan LaChance

You have me wishing I could go to film school!!  Ahh wishes....

For some reason, now I also want to listen to "A Magic Carpet Ride."

I used to have the biggest crush on Jasmine.  She's so hot.

What-o-what does this point to in my shadow?

Please Log in to Vote.

1 out of 1 members found this useful.

I feel what you are describing

Posted October 27th, 2009 by Ambo Suno

Mark, I feel much of what you are describing as you write it here. That first lecture sounds so cool.

"He paused for a moment and then dramatically told us that the rectangle on the board represented the motion picture frame, and that every element within that frame had the power to affect the viewer’s body, heart, mind, and spirit. With a twinkle in his eyes, he promised that he would teach us the rules/structures governing these elements of expression." What a powerful statement, and what a huge and unequivocating promise.

"My perception of myself, the cinema, and the world profoundly shifted as I sat in the back of that classroom and listened to Lester explain how the expressive elements of space, line, shape, tone, color, movement, rhythm, and contrast and affinity, influence the physiological (UR), psychological (UL), cultural (LL), and social/environmental (LR) experience of the cinematic audience." Good stuff.

I get the accurate connection between your description and my memory of the experience. "For example, in the opening of the first Star Wars (1977) we see a relatively large spaceship fly across the screen. Suddenly, another spaceship appears in hot pursuit of the first ship. As the hull of this pursuit spaceship progressively enters the frame for an extended period of time, the viewer is surrounded by a deep rumbling sound that moves from the back of the theater to the front. This amalgamation of the visually expressive elements of open space (the ship extending beyond the edges of the frame), spatial contrast (difference in size between the two ships), and movement (the relative movement of the two ships), combines with the spatially-moving depth-representational sounds to produce a powerful synchronization of the senses that replicates the experience of actually sitting under this massive ship. In an instant filmmaker George Lucas stylistically and viscerally communicates a deep archetypal message to the viewer, the message that we are about to see an epic struggle against a great and mighty force."

As an aside, I totally loved that scene that was also archetypal in a very different way. The bar scene with so many varied types. And the flying across the dessert scene that leads up to that. My faves.

ambo

Please Log in to Vote.

0 out of 0 members found this useful.

awesome

Posted October 28th, 2009 by steven martini

hey mark

i was a huge star wars fan growing up - it was the revelation - when i was 5 - that indiana jones and han solo were played by the same person - that it was his 'job' to play those characters - it inspired me to want to work in the same business he works in -

of course now i think of it as a bit of a curse, lol...

i'm curious as to what your perspective is on the whole star wars prequel phenomenon - how poorly received the prequel episodes 1-3 were by many if not most fans who had their childhoods forever changed by this mythology

 

there were so many factors involved in the dissonance between an artist and his audience 

but i bet it's a worthy and fun journey to look at through an integral lens. Here's a start:

 

The Artist

famous for bringing joseph campbells work to the public - and basing the original trilogy on the structure of an operatic 'hero's journey' -

the prequels, we can say, did not seem to come from as explicitly enlightening a framework as campbells study of mythology -

is it lucas's long hiatus from his craft - coming back from being a financeer and a sfx guru to being a cinematic storyteller - that left gaps in his skills? or did he evolve to something we have yet to recognize?

 

 

The Audience:

the first cinematic mythology for generation X. in the 30 span between the originals and the prequels, they've changed. so has Lucas.  but did they change together? was Lucas's simple storytelling outdated to their post modern tastes?

or was he above them, giving them something too ahead of their capacity to understand - to some he certainly seemed to look down on them - expecting them to accept less from him - what were their expectations of these films? could they live up to the cultural shadow projection of a generation of privileged and stirred imaginations?

what are the other elements to consider? anyone else have thoughts or feelings?

--

∞ 1 2 3 4 3 2 1 ∞