Tuesday, 7 August 2012

A comparison of Fritz Lang's two different darkness!


Fritz Lang (1890-1976)

"Master of the Darkness," remarked by the British Film Institute, was dedicated to an Austrian-American Film director and producer, Fritz Lang (British Film Institute, 2009) . He was born in Vienna, in 1890 and had grown up by the influences of the German Expressionist building era. He especially developed the ideology of film Noir genre with the use of heavy expressionistic cinematography and psychological paranoia (influenced by Sigmund Freud). Out of his remarkable works, there are the two expressionist movies that I want to compare; "The Metropolis" (1927) and his first talking picture movie "M" (1931), both which were written together by Fritz Lang and his wife, Thea Von Harbou. With the analysis in cinematography to compare these two movies, I would like to further explain about them specifically on mise-se-scene, narrative structure and expressionism in them.

1) Metropolis (1927)

Starring

Plot: The movie was set in the time of 2026 when the time of extreme industrialization would be developed, and resulting two drastically different classes of civilization; the city of the riches and the workers. When the son of a rich owner of the industry fell in love by at first sight with a young woman Maria, from the workers' city, he left his upper status and went deep down into the workers' places. Meanwhile, a scientist was working on a robotic project for the industry owner, and eventually created another humanoid robot of Maria. That finally turned out to be an evil witch and destructed the whole system of the industry and the workers' city.

Mise-se-scene

   


     This is the the abstract shot from this movie "Metropolis", where the son went down into the workers' city and found Maria preaching and comforting the exhausted workers.

There is a dominant contrast to attract our eyes (and Freder, the son's eyes) towards Maria to create an angel-like appearance through a juxtaposition with lights and darkness. Also, the color of the rest of the workers was wearing all black and only Maria is wearing white that draws out the attention most. The lighting style is very perceived with studio sets and the key was very low lighting to create shadows and darkness, to make the audience to expect a mystery and horror throughout the movie. And most obviously, this low angle shot up to Maria  points out the importance being of a person among the fellow workers.

Expressionist effects
Fritz Lang used expressionist style of lighting throughout the whole movie in Metropolis. Especially, with the effect of chiaroscuro, which is the technique of using extremely low key and high contrast lighting styles in most black and white movie, he created 'Metropolis' to be a successful film Noir. Besides, the costume designs had also made this movie very expressionistic. For example, the uniform black costumes for every single industry worker to express the lack of uniqueness, individuality and personality in them. They were like some kind of robots hired to work and sacrifice their lives in the industry to run the business. On the other hand, the very extraordinary costumes worn by the upper class of the people expressed they were like angels and gods lived in their own paradise. But most of all, the settings itself to display the background is the obvious part of expressionism. The use of unrealistic vehicles, demons like machines, skyscrapers and all futurist technology, that indeed made us imagine to be like in a very industrialized future.
  


Narrative Structure
The movie started with showing of the extreme futuristic style of the civilization in the Metropolis city; such as the modern buildings and skyscrapers, the vehicles and sky roads. On top of one of the industrial buildings, Freder and his friends were having leisure time with so many luxury things on earth, pointing out the flawless and perfect lifestyle of the upper class of the society. There were no such things that he needs as he can just get 'anything' he wants, until he met Maria coming up to his place from the workers' city. It is like Joseph Campbell's call to the adventure for Freder. He was so interested in Maria that finally he decided himself to go through this Odyssey down into the workers' city. 
While he was visiting Maria, he was so in shock to see the ugliness and horrifying truth of the lives of the workers that he didn't even hear about it before. He did not know what to do while facing this obstacle but just returned back to his father to stop the running industry. The climax broke down when Evil Maria robot urging the workers to destroy the machinery (that would later flood the workers' city).  In order to save the misunderstanding but massive furious workers, Freder was not afraid to go against them to stop them by explaining. Then, he also went further down into the drowning city to save his Maria and the children.


2) M (1931)

Starring
Peter Lorre                  
Otto Wernicke
Gustaf Gründgens
Ellen Widmann
Inge Landgut
Theodor Loos 
Friedrich Gnass

Plot: There was someone unknown who was murdering the children in Berlin. The Police got informed by the victim citizens and they were so thrilled to catch the murderer intensely. This harsh search by the cops through the public places, clubs and bars actually started to make the other 'normal' criminals blocked to continue their crimes or illegal works. Thus, to catch the murderer as soon as possible either by the cops or the criminals was a very important matter to handle. The word, 'M' was used in a very powerful artistic technique of a 'sign' to indicate the real murderer in town!

Mise-se-scene

  This snapshot scene of the movie, M was about Peter Lorre (the murderer) was running away from the cops and hiding in the corner to avoid the other criminals who were eager to catch him.

There is a very contrasty and a mix of lighting and shadows in this black and white movie that made Peter Lorre to stand out very clearly to the audience even though he was in the darkness. Definitely it was the sharp focus on Peter Lorre to attract the audience's eyes to catch him immediately in the dark. The lighting used in this movie also used perceived and low key lighting in most of the scenes and again the technique of chiaroscuro to create a Noir feeling about criminality and thrillers. The color of the suite Peter wearing was a black, expressing the identity of the villain. The camera shot is just a medium to intensify the subject and compare with the other object (the shadow in the back). To create a dramatic effect and make the audience as voyeurs, the camera was angled in the eye level shot.

Expressionist effects
Again, our master of the darkness used a very expressionist style of lighting to express what is the deeper meaning of the movie, rather than narrating through most dialogues in the movie. Especially with the splendid use of shadows, in the scenes where an unknown murderer was coming to get the victim, where Peter Lorre was caught up in the cells of storage rooms, and where he was blocked from all sides of the other criminals to catch him (busted! :D ). Talking about the costumes, and apart from being black, Peter Lorre looked like any other people in this movie. He was not dressed up to look like a criminal, no bodily features (example: mustache, beard, crooked teeth and giant bodies), and no signs of wearing masks and gloves. This expressed the deeper and inner personality of a character despite the out looks in innocence and simplicity. Besides, the use of excellent props to substitute for the ugly and shocking time for the audience were the excellent settings to express. For example, the balloon Elsie was playing then hanged on the wired, the ball rolling over the ditch were expressive that the audience instantly got the idea of the girl being dead. Or Raped? The most important thing was a recurring motif throughout the movie which was whistling. It was like the trigger and the call of the death-coming in this expressionist thriller movie which made this movie even more expressionistic.

Narrative Structure
The Sigmund Freud theory of unconsciousness was well played in this movie, "M".  It was the freedom of id without the control of the superego. Peter Lorre was more like a kid without controlling by a father figure and started following the desire of killing the children in Berlin. The news about the murderer was everywhere in the town; that from the beginning of the movie, the audience got the exposition by the riddles the kid were singing. And from the time, the little girl Elsie didn't reach home, the police started investigating and searching by the clues through the public places. This intense search by the cops made the other criminals to back off with their jobs and thus, those criminals too, were very eager to catch the kid murderer. There was a parallel investigation and watch over between the cops and the criminals but in very much different level they are going. Police went from the top surface of the investigation and only spread out by the circular distance to get further (horizontal). However, the criminals, they knew the murderer was no different than any of the men in the streets, just nearby the neighborhood. So they spread out the people down in the streets secretly, choreographic placings with different people to make it less obvious that they were after the murderer (vertical).
         As soon as one of the criminal spies suspected Peter Lorre with another girl, he marked Peter with a sign, "M" to easier follow him. Peter, later found out that he was being chased by this mark, he started to run away in fear, to the office top ceilings. And there was extreme excitement during the moment when the criminals were searching him in the office through several places. Peter Lorre was finally caught and put in the court of the criminals and the mothers of the victim kids. He defended himself that he could not help doing that even though he was not intending to do. He was even afraid of that desire coming into his mind and he'd been running away from it but he could not just withstand. It was more like a psychological disorder case than a regular murder. The movie ended in suspense whether the case should be judged by the desire of the victims and to put him in a death sentence, or he should be treated in a mental hospital as he has been just a patient. The facial expression of Peter Lorre even exaggerated the feelings of doubt to the audience. I, wanted him to die in the first place personally, but looking from his face and eyes, I could see the fear, the tears and the fact that he was telling the truth about his mental disorder that also suspended me in uncertainty

Conclusion
These two movies were just 2 examples out of the whole marvelous jobs done by Fritz Lang. Both his German and American film critics  appreciated all of his expressionist movies and thought of him as the father of film Noir genre. His famous film Noir were so much in brutality, pain and horror that during his career life in Hollywood, his worldview was becoming more and more pessimistic. Lang then abandoned his works and returned to Germany and died in 1976 and from that time, he was interred in the Forest Lawn- Hollywood Hills Cemetery in Los Angeles


References
"Fritz Lang: Master of Darkness." British Film Institute, 22 Jan. 2009. Web. 6 Aug. 2012. <http://www.bfi.org.uk/features/lang/>.

Kauffmann, Stanley. "The Criterion Collection." Current. The Criterion Collection, 4 Dec. 2004. Web. 07 Aug. 2012.

Krebs, Albin. "Fritz Lang, Film Director Noted for 'M,' Dead at 85." The NewYork Times. N.p., 03 Aug. 1976. Web. 07 Aug. 2012.

Kreimeier, Klaus (1999). The Ufa story: a history of Germany's greatest film company, 1918–1945. Berkeley: University of California Press. p. 156.

  

1 comment:

  1. LAURA YUNN
    1. I specifically said that your comparison essay has to be about films we did not discuss in class. I guess I'll take Metropolis that way, but you should have found another Lang film besides M.
    2. Good analysis, but there is also the soft focus and the candlelight. You miss the semiotcs of religion – a holy place – a saint.
    3. You pretty much say the obvious here. You don't thoroughtly examine the expressionsim of ONE scene – and go deeper into the details.
    4. Again, superficial. You mostly describe the plot, not analyse it.
    5. It would have been more effective if you had compared the movies alternately rather than doing them one at a time.
    6. This paragraph is very difficult to understand. What are you saying? You seem to be assembling a list of stuff – but with very little analysis.
    7. I'm not sure what you mean by “vertical”.
    8. Mostly what you do in this paragraph is describe the plot. I already know it.
    This essay is disappointing. You mostly describe the two films without directly comparing them. There is much to compare: the two cities; children and innocence, the Marxist construct, even the Freudian constructs (the superego and id). But mostly, you give a few details. Your discussion of cinematography and lighting is good.
    C+ 75

    ReplyDelete