am i a cynic?

[belovedmonster]

Im reading all this stuff about Psycho and some of it is just hard to believe!

Like it talks about how the visual imagery is full of horizontal and vertical things such as the tall vertical house and the long horizontal motel, and scythes and rakes in the hardware shop and that this represents the slashes of a blade or some ****

Another book talks about the link between the fact the money stolen was intended for that guys daughter and the fact when she is packing to run away thier is a picture of a baby and all the connotations of that.

Also the refrences to Marion being an angel in the shower with the shower head being the halo above, and in the parler just before when they eat sanwiches there is a picture of an angel and above it there is a picture of a bird of prey.

come on? It seems to me that even if you are the master of this visual stuff not every little thing on screen represents something.

Ive always thought these critics sometimes read way too much into stuff! Or if it really is true, i think it comes so naturaly to the film maker that its only when you pick things apart like this that they come to be noticed.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 15, 2003 06:48 PM: Message edited by: belovedmonster ]</font>

[Tom Servo]

Beloved Monster-
I totally agree with you. After taking Honors English 10, I've grown sick of hearing what represents what, who is a "Christ figure", how this shows this- can't people just tell stories? I agree that you only see these things if the author is a natural (I think Franz Kafka is a good example) at placing thoughtful symbolism, or if you are one that looks for these things. JRR Tolkien was often questioned regarding "Lord of the Rings" being a metaphor for World War 2, with the Ring as nuclear weapons. Tolkien told everyone that he only wanted to write a good story, and that he did.
If you stare at any movie (try it with "Road House" hehe) long enough I imagine you could find anything, and critics DO find anything.
mendon

[Yammeryammeryammer]

Psycho is one of my favorite films, but I still think people take a lot of it as much more serious and meaningful because it is a 'classic'. Even Hitchcock said he thought it was more of a comedy than anything. But I'd buy that bird thing more than the others just because there is a lot of bird undertones throughout the film. What I found cool was the levels of things, like that conversation between Arboghast and Norman Bates, the camera tilts and raises to alter the level based on who is in control of the conversation. But anyway, where was I going with this? Oh ya, I agree. But I think some imagery things are overanalyzed just as often as they are missed.

[Generic Skinhead]

Lol- you wanted a book on the artistic side of directing and now your saying that meaning in visuals is largly nonsense! Try reading a few interpretations of Citizen Kane if you really wanna do your head in!

I have to say I find all that stuff quite interesting. All though, i concede, there is a point where its just pretentious-like trying to insert a meaning into "Final Destination."

[redlum]

Ambiguity can be a wonderful thing

I hate Cynics. Optimism IS a revolutionary act.

[Paul Mack]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><table border="0" width="90%" bgcolor="#333333" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="0"><tr><td width="100%"><table border="0" width="100%" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="2" bgcolor="#FF9900"><tr><td width="100%" bgcolor="#DDDDDD"><font size=2 face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I totally agree with you. After taking Honors English 10, I've grown sick of hearing what represents what, who is a "Christ figure", how this shows this- can't people just tell stories? </font></td></tr></table></td></tr></table></BLOCKQUOTE>

I'm a high school English teacher so I understand where you're coming from and if you read some of the books that I think you've read then the answer is yes, most of the time they are trying to put different motifs underneath the surface.
"The Great Gatsby" practically beats you over the head with it.

With films though there is a lot less of that. Listen to Robert Rodriguez's commentary for the first four minutes and he has some pretty good comments for what we are discussing.

On the flip side listen to Andy Garcia ramble on about the "tapestry of the camerawork" in the Oceans Eleven commentary as Matt Damon and Brad Pitt ignore him.

Later,
Paul

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 18, 2003 09:44 AM: Message edited by: Paul M. ]</font>

[Vlad the Impaler]

I agree with this, sometimes you can read too much into things.

When I'm thinking of a shot, I think what would look best first, then I think of its connotations and if it has a lot of connotations too I think its a great shot but the look of a shot is a lot more important than what it represents.

Paul mentioned oceans eleven. Near the end of the film, there is a long shot of everyone involved in the heist, A long shot, it doesn't break, everyone is placed evenly in the frame etc. representing unity, a chain of all equal characters working together to achieve one goal. However on the commentary they sed they just wanted a long shot showing everyone! so just depends how you read into things I suppose!

[miker]

IMO the best thing about Hitchcock movies are the Saul Bass title sequences.

Never been a Hitchcock fan, though I appreciate his skill and trombone shot.

Hitchcock would also give some great direction to his second unit:
"Get me a shot of a car pulling away and turning left"

He would also give interviews whilst principal photography was in full swing (ie at the actual time that actual takes are being shot):
"They don't need me, they know what they are doing"
(I can only assume the interview was conducted off-set, too!)

A genious of non-pretentious filmmaking, but a true artist IMO. Still doesn't make me a fan though.

[foolmaster2]

Skinhead, remember me?
I also remember Miker
and Vlad.

I agree, not everything in a film has to represent something,especially if youre not even going to notice half of the things being shown to you.

its early here, so this will need some editing.

<font color="#a62a2a" size="1">[ June 20, 2003 11:06 AM: Message edited by: Bliss ist Qual ]</font>

[twister!]

A lot of it is subliminal, so you may 'THINK' that you don't notice it but it is affecting the way you perceive a scene.

And some of the stuff that people attempt to 'READ INTO' things is actually BS.