Print

Print


Two more, effectively employed cases of off-screen space, complementary 
perhaps to Noel Burch's classification of 6 segments.

1. In Bunuel's Viridiana, a bunch of officials walk forward staring 
off-screen, ahead and upward amazed and stupefied. After holding the shot 
for awhile, a sudden quick camera movement follows the direction on their 
looks and reveals Don Jaime, hanged on a tree (after having committed 
suicide).

2. In Kurosawa's Rashomon,  after inciting "The Thief" and "The Husband" to 
fight each other, "The Woman" appears on-screen in a close shot, watching 
the fight, which takes place off-screen. Through her head movements and 
facial expressions, the viewers is invited to imagine the fight.

Both case are analysed in detail, with story-boards, as instances of 
employing the tension between on-screen and off-screen space as expressive 
elements, in my book "Cinematic Expression" (not available in English)

Haim

----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Warren Buckland
  To: [log in to unmask]
  Sent: Monday, January 02, 2012 1:02 PM
  Subject: [FILM-PHILOSOPHY] off-screen space


  Someone already mentioned Noel Burch’s seminal study of off-screen space 
(in his book Theory of Film Practice). Burch divides it into 6 segments – 
the four spaces beyond each frame line, the space hidden within the frame 
(this is the space Jose mentions when referring to Jaws), plus the space 
behind the camera, which as far as I'm aware hasn’t been mentioned in this 
discussion yet.


  Also, it is important to point out that all films of course have off 
screen space; the key is to identify films where it is employed effectively 
or in an unusual manner. For example, a character may exit off screen right 
but return (without a cut) to on screen space from off screen left. Either 
they have walked behind the camera (therefore drawing attention to the 
camera or the space in front of the image) or they have somehow moved from 
right to left while hidden in the frame. In all cases, our expectations 
about where characters are and what they are doing while off screen is 
challenged. Both art cinema directors and directors like Spielberg 
creatively manipulate off screen space in this way.


  Jose also mentioned Youssef Ishaghpour's 90 page study of space and 
narrative in Touch of Evil. I haven't read it, but I have read Stephen 
Heath's ,er, 90 page study of space and narrative in Touch of Evil 
(published in Screen in the 1970s). Has anyone read both?


  Warren Buckland
  Reader in Film Studies
  Oxford Brookes University




    Date:    Sun, 1 Jan 2012 18:39:06 +0000
    From:    jose manuel Martins <[log in to unmask]>
    Subject: Re: Off-space

    Hi all

    By definition, the *natural* abode of the *supernatural* is off-screen
    space: as the most obvious tour-de-force on its thorough invisibility, 
*The
    Blair Witch Project *(mostly the ending). Terror is enhanced through the
    collusion of *Our* innermost off-screen space and *the Other’s* 
innermost
    off-screen space, turning two ‘*exteriors*’ into one and the same 
*interior*:
    thence, our helplessness.

    *Jaws* is another perfect candidate: the Ocean conspicuouslly offers a 
sort
    of an *off-screen on screen* dimension; and the tension between deep 
waters
    horror (the Other’s space) coming onto the beach nearby (Our space) is 
yet
    another variation on the interior/exterior or nearby/away scheme.



     As a (90 pages long) theoretical tour-de-force on *Touch of Evil* ’s
    spacial and narrative structuring in terms of the *on and off
    screen*quintessential
    *noir* interplay:

    Youssef ISHAGHPOUR

    *Orson Welles cinéaste. **Une caméra visible* (Orson Welles the film
    director: a visible camera)

    [Éditions de la Différence, "Essais" coll., 2001. Vol.1: 600 pp., ISBN:
    2-72911-32-58. Vol. 2: 300 pp., ISBN: 2-72911-32-66. Vol. 3: 300 pp., 
ISBN:
    2-72911- 32-74],

    *Vol.III, pp. 377-470*

    **

    As for comedy  - ‘noir’ comedy -,   *C’est arrivé près de chez vous*  (
    Dir.: Rémy Belvaux, André Bonzel, Benoît Poelvoorde   - Belgium, 1992 ):
    once again the (this time) unsettling comical effect being produced 
through
    our participation (as ethically responsible implied voyeurs) in the film’s
    ostensive off-screen space, ocuppied by its direct addressees: the 
camera
    and the apparently detached team that goes along documenting the 
atrocities
    of a small criminal and big lunatic, who boasts to them looking at us.


    José Martins
    Dep. of Philosophy
    University of Évora  - Portugal



  -- Film-Philosophy After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of 
the message you are replying to To leave, send the message: leave 
film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask] Or visit: 
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html For technical help 
email: [log in to unmask], not the list -- Film-Philosophy Journal: 
http://www.film-philosophy.com/ Film-Philosophy Conference: 
http://www.film-philosophy.com/conference/ Contact: 
[log in to unmask] --  

--
Film-Philosophy
After hitting 'reply' please always delete the text of the message you are replying to
To leave, send the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask]
Or visit: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html
For technical help email: [log in to unmask], not the list
--
Film-Philosophy Journal: http://www.film-philosophy.com/
Film-Philosophy Conference: http://www.film-philosophy.com/conference/
Contact: [log in to unmask]
--