“As for the scenario, the “fable,” or “tale,” I only consider it at the end. I can state that the scenario constructed in this manner has no importance, since I use it merely as a pretext for the “stage effect,” the “tricks,” or for a nicely arranged tableau.” This source was said by “master of illusion” (Ezra, 2000, p. 51) Georges Méliès describing his thoughts towards the narratives of his films. Méliès focused on the “attraction” rather than the narrative as he wanted to show what the Cinematographe could achieve. Although Méliès followed the Lumiere Brothers short films, he differed from them: the Lumiere’s showed actuality films - the “documentary aspect of cinema” (North, 2008, p.51). In juxtaposition to this, Méliès presents the extraordinary, providing an ethereal experience for the spectator. However, Gunning argues, that they both present “a series of views” or images to the audience whether that’s it was “realistic illusion or magic illusion” (Gunning, 1990, p.57) based on the new spectacle of film technology. The Cinema of Attractions according to Gunning is “the ability to show something” (Gunning, 1990, p.57) resulting in exhibitionist cinema. Gunning also refers to “attractions” as having “unrelated acts in a non-narrative” and “illogical performances” (Gunning, 1990, p. 60) implying it was about showing not telling as shown when Méliès is gesturing for us to look at The Vanishing Lady (1896), there is no plot but about showing us the act. He says that Sergei Einstein came up with the term “attraction” when discussing the theatre and that the audience should absorb “illusionary depictions” (Gunning, 1990, p. 59) suggesting that the audience are allowing themselves to be tricked due to the ideas of escapist cinema and what it was capable of. Although “actuality films outnumbered fictional films until 1906” (Gunning, 1990, p. 56) Méliès’s films are hardly narrative driven and his intention is to show what cinema can do as presented in Voyage dans la Lune (1902) which simply follows a trip to the moon. The film lacks a narrative, as explained in Gunning’s reading, as it “expends little energy creating characters…it’s energy moves outward towards an acknowledged spectator rather than inward towards the character-based situations essential to classical narrative.” (Gunning, 1990, p. 59) Méliès treated character and narrative as an afterthought as film was a new medium. People were used to the narrative of the theatre, with film, the audience was focused on what it could do at this point, rather than the potential for narrative. Méliès treats the narrative of the film as an afterthought: “consider[s] it at the end” the important factor is the effects. Méliès describes the scenario as “a thread intended to link the ‘effects’ [to]…charm and intrigue” the audience (Hammond,1974, p.57) excellent. Méliès began as a magician so it is no surprise that his intent is to use visual trickery to interest the audience. This is evident through the theatrical aspects of his filmmaking including the static camera (like the audience are watching a show) and the fact that the first glass studio he built had the “exact dimensions of the théâtre Robert-Houdin” (Lewis, 2008, p.27) Méliès’s desire to present wonderment to the audience and experiment with this new technology to present “the dreams of cinema” something which he pioneered (North, 2015, p.128). Méliès “exploited the technological capacities of cinema” (Allen & Gomery, 1985, p.56) and has been described as the “father of special effects” (North, 2015, p. 128) for this reason. Although he performed his actual tricks in front of the camera he also “performed magic in the editing room…to create effects that were both spectacular and narratively motivated.” (Ezra, 2000, p.24). These phantasmagorical effects can be seen throughout his films. In The Vanishing Lady (1896) we see an example of his substitution splicing which presents a person or object’s disappearance on screen. In this example we see Méliès place a cloth over a woman and when it is removed she disappears. Then a skeleton suddenly appears and when he repeats the action of placing the cloth over her, she reappears. This was simply done with the magic of editing, which meant they were able to cut out when things were moved in front of the camera, resulting in the lady appearing to have vanished. Another example of Méliès’s techniques is the replication editing used in The Four Troublesome Heads (1898) where Méliès is presented centrally taking off and throwing his head in the air and then it’s shown on the table in the next cut. The fact that Méliès takes us to new worlds and “the domain of the marvellous” (Hammond, 1974, p.57) presents escapism and what cinema was capable of rather than experiencing everyday life as shown in the Lumiere Brother’s films. Méliès shows us a mermaid in La Sirène (1904), a fairy kingdom in Le Royaume des Fées (1903) and Ghosts in The Haunted Castle (1891), transporting his audience to new worlds and allowing them to experience new things which was what the cinema of attractions was about. Levi Strauss is quoted as saying “At long last we…really witness gods ascending rainbows to their castles in the sky...and sirens at the bottom of the ocean. And we would take it for real. Above all this is what I would ask of cinema” (Hammond, 1974, p. 1) From this quote you can infer that the audience knew they were being tricked but that was all part of the attraction and the escapist quality of cinema meaning that the audience wanted to experience new things. In conclusion from the points I have made and by using Gunning’s the Cinema of Attractions and other key readings it is clear to see that as a result of the times; narrative cinema was an afterthought as it was prominently about spectacle and the capabilities of cinema. This is supported by Gunning’s reading as it is “the ability to show something” (Gunning, 1990, p. 57) rather than telling something. This was presented through Méliès’s work who used tricks and effects to create wonderment for the audience and present phantasmagorical images on screen. This shows how narrative was purely the thread holding the spectacle together as in the beginning of film, it was about showing the capabilities of cinema rather than the narrative itself. Bibliography-
C. Allen. R & Gomery, D. (1985) Film History Theory and Practice. New York: McGraw Hill, Inc. Ezra, E. (2000) Georges Méliès The Birth of the auteur. Manchester: Manchester University Press Gunning, T. (1990) The Cinema of Attractions: Early Film, its Spectator and the Avant-Garde. London: BFI Publishing Hammond, P. (1974) Marvellous Méliès. London: The Gordon Fraser Gallery, Ltd. Méliès, G. (Director). (1904) La Sirène [Motion Picture]. France: Star Film Company Méliès, G. (Director). (1903) Le Royaume des Fées [Motion Picture]. France: Star Film Company Méliès, G. (Director). (1898) The Four Troublesome Heads [Motion Picture]. France: Star Film Company Méliès, G. (Director). (1891) The Haunted Castle [Motion Picture]. France: Star Film Company Méliès, G. (Director). (1896) The Vanishing Lady [Motion Picture]. France: Star Film Company Méliès, G. (Director). (1902) Voyage dans la Lune [Motion Picture]. France: Star Film Company North,D. (2015) Being Georges Méliès. In D. North, B. Rehak & M.S Duffy (Eds.), Special Effects New Histories/ Theories/ Contexts (pp. 127-140) London: British Film Institute North,D. (2008) Performing Illusions Cinema, Special Effects and the Virtual Actor. London: Wallflower Press
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorMegan Hilborne is a freelance film writer and graduated from the University of Portsmouth in 2020 with a degree in film. ArchivesCategories |