Animation Films Analysis - Essay Example

Question Selected Drawing on the work of Christian Metz and/or Roland Barthes, explore aspects of the narrative structure s in ONE film from the module. How does such an analysis help us to understand how the film produces meaning Introduction Cinematic fiction renders the ordinary world lucid. As the cinema narration completes within a couple of hours, the reality of the aspect or the incident or a course of action shown or narrated can be understood but with deviation from reality. Whatever reality we attribute to Cinema narration is about the accuracy of facts and clarity of the picture that is compatible with the narration and facts. This narration helps to understand the ordinary world in an interceptive manner with the perception of the narrator. Narration is different in different media. The narration in Cinema is different from that of in books, history and psychology. This is due to the motion picture it involves during narration. As the motion picture is absent in books and psychology, the narration need to be a little bit dramatic to make a mark on the mind of the viewer. This is not the case with books, where the standard of the narration is crucial to determine the standard of the effect on the mind of the reader. Due to this the narration in film will help the viewer to see all the world's stories within a single structure framed by combined effort of script, director and other production team. According to Roland Barthes, the extracting from each tale its model, then out of these models making great narrative structure by reapplying is exhausting and undesirable. While stating this he is opposing individual models for different tales that diversify the cinema narration. This statement supports the narration of world's stories under a single structure like ascetics see the whole landscape in a single bean. There are enough doubts about the validity of the statement when the tales of different cultures and different environments are considered. Do single structure for cinema narration holds good for different tales of different environments and cultures. This statement is made While Roland Barthes talks bout reality. When we consider same reality, according to Robin Wood, Metz is being insufficiently concrete and too concerned about abstract proposals. This abstractness, according to the view of Robin wood, will decrease the standard of reality. The naturality in narration of certain films and singularity in the body of the text made number of critics like robin wood to criticise the works of Christian Metz. They term the works as exploitation of filmic analysis. The abstract theories of Metz are opposite to cohesion and structure of the film while considering the film as representation or as a world. While making these comments or criticism, there is no reference about reality. Affecting the reality is affecting the truth. The truth of film cannot be expressed through Metz's system of narration as they are being more abstract. So according to critics of Metz, too much abstractness may affect truth or reality in terms of ordinary understanding. In this case, there should be different structures to different types of stories that give completely different conclusions. The film may appear in the form of obsession and desire if the narration is too abstract. One cannot tally obsession or desire with truth as the desire will be truth if it is fulfilled. So the desires cannot be expressed in narration of cinema Do they effect the reality of the narration involved These are the questions to be answered while considering or criticising the abstractness of Metz and his theories. This type of criticism is due to the virulence with which Metz has been criticised is not due to lack of importance to structure of narration in the film but the abstract nature and too much organics he opposed. The opposing of organics or naturality is due to the emphasis on abstractness and he may not directly opposed the reality or naturality but the abstract sounding of his theories might have affected the reality in narration. 1 Analysis: The analysis of narration methods increased with works of French Theorist Christian Metz, who has built linguistic theory. He along with Roland Barthes set the ground for narrative and discourse analysis. There is a thin line of differentiation between narration and discourse. This should be considered, while making analysis of narration or discourse. Then According to Metz the cinema could signify and generate a meaning in a dynamic process. If it is true again a question may arise from his critics. Do the abstractness can be dynamic while processing. This depends upon material signifiers and representational images. The titles and spoken language mingle with music and a range of signifieds. The compatibility of music and other range of aspects in the cinema should be in a manner that can be understood easily by the viewer. The meaning that is made by majority of the viewers will be the truth and if it is abstract, one can find it difficult to find commonality between truth and reality. Can truth be conveyed without or a little reality This is another question that may arise if truth and reality in the narration are separately discussed. This led to the denotative and connotative meanings. The evaluation of cinematic equivalents to language and systematically defined codes at work pointed out the realism in the system. The analysis of narration may break down a text's code but it involves cultural contexts and restrictions also. In other words cultural contexts may result in restrictions as different cultures understand picture and audio in different manners. In this case language is taken as social force that struggles to take shape while we think and act. The differences between languages makes it difficult to make single structure for cinema narration on universal basis. Then arises a question about the narration of realism and fiction. Fiction cannot be a reality until it comes true in future. It cannot be termed as reality until it materialises or can be termed as future reality in the narration theories of Cinema As a solution for this question, the narration of realism and fiction need to be different. The realist novels offer coherent world view to naturalise status quo of culture. This coherence should be reflected in cinema narration and it depends on structure adopted and language or script used. The criticism arises when the fictional is masked as natural. The fiction can be termed as natural in the future as it has no material proof in the present. In this manner the reality in the narration talks about material proof indirectly and the narration regarding fiction should be different. This may solve some problems and will against Roland Barthes proposition of single structure. Here the need of different structures is emphasises depending on reality and fiction but not on the basis of tales as understood by Barthes. This mask comes under impression of reality. The different structures for reality and fiction may avoid the mask of reality over fiction. The intertextual and extra textual codes of spectator ship and ideology become a central component of narrative theory. Should the narrative theories incorporate different ideologies of the spectatorship This depends on the instance and context of narration and spectatorship. While narrative instance is taken as a process of enunciation, it is presented in impersonal and objective manner. The objective of the narration either for a reality or for a fiction is to create a perception or convey the narrator's perception to the viewers. The narration should be logical enough and clear to convey the perception. The logic convinces and clarity conveys the perception of narrator to spectatorship. In a different aspect to this, the discourse includes markers of narration in literature as the difference simplified down to presentation of information. The processing and presentation of information in narration and discourse will be in a different manner. The narration in text is different from narration in film and there is a difference in language that involves syntax and cinematic modes of address. The advantage of cinematic narration is verbal communication. The verbal communication tries to unmask the texts that are under pretension to tell the stories. Some times the cinematic narration talks about realities with a different syntax and language that is expressed in books or literature. This is due to the specificity of cinema merged with interest in linguistics, psychoanalysis and cultural studies and localised attention. The cultural studies and localised attention may not allow single structure for cinema narration all over the world and for different tales and scripts. The analysis of narration and structure are concerned about the cinema's ability to position the subject.2 Realism and position of the subject: When the position of the subject is considered the use of realism may be a malleable category of artistic classification. Do the classification is only for subject but also for reality. If it is for reality, does reality differs from subject to subject This question makes the disappearance of truth in some cases according to Jacobson. When the realism is coded into symbolic like that of truth, this can be termed as a mode of realism. This mode of realism can be a part of cinema narration. This makes the move of the cinema to be at the core of modern relation ship amidst art and the real. Again a question arises about the difference between art and reality. Can we distinguish art from reality And all arts are not real ones This depends on perception and understanding. Here the abstractness of Metz may work well. Being humankind's most popular symbolic medium, a slippage zone between real and imaginary results in polemical technology of the real and ideological bent. The propagation of home video in the last two decades and reality television the academic and philosophical evolution of narration has been developed a new code of cinematic realism. In this context, Dogme 95 has come into being. This manifests the vow of chastity that stipulates ten rules. These demand stripping down the film process. This affects the code of beliefs and aspirations of viewers and counters the dominant tendencies of cinema. The deflowering of film's truth claim may cause consequences of advent of structuralism according to Bazin and will be dependent on development of Althusserian Marxism. This brings into discussion the central and post structuralist reconsideration of the cinematic apparatus. The subject in relation to apparatus will emerge from this process. In the language of Films Metz proposes an analysis of film that has been developed from beginning and involved ontological characteristics. Before Metz, the cinematic language has been forged and connotative study made film a form of art. As film is a visual transfer, the Barthesian ides is to uncodify the denotative reproduction from reality medium. The important implications of denotative functions are analogy and ontological claim. Classical Hollywood exhibits the code of fiction into reality and succeeded in its attempt. The production and post production means also helped it in the process. This has been possible by erasing the previous codes and illusion of pure sense. The illusion will be far away from reality or truth. The consequence of this success is to assert the relation to painting through cinemas' adaptation of Italian renaissance perspective. The same perspective may not work in all type of cultures and tales of diverse nature. The relevant relation between reality, nature and culture are to be considered while cinema performs symbolic function. This makes the status of subjective cinema at a high cost of actual reality. This is because the conventions of classical cinema adopted some stages of manipulation in order to supply the spectator a real subject position and that will be at cost when subject position of cinema is being considered. This removes the illusions adopted by cinema narration and television and video modes bring truth claim of video culture. This rises from a basic contradiction of conventions of cinematic processes and apparatus. This results in neo realistic and truth oriented narration that minimises the manipulation and symbolism. The minimisation of manipulation and symbolism also makes a narration nearer to truth and reality. The manipulation of context and aspect may deter the narration from truth or reality. This may be applicable in case of fiction but not in all circumstances.3 References 1. Sam Rohdie, 1975, Metz and film semiotics: opening the field, Jumpcut, Online, Available from internet, http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/onlinessays/JC07folder/Metz.html 2. Film Encyclopedia, 2007, Narrative theory, Film Encyclopedia, online. Available on internet http://www.filmreference.com/encyclopedia/Independent-Film-Road-Movies/Narrative-NARRATIVE-THEORY.html 3. Hunter Vaughan, 2004, Tremble of Truth, Dogme 95, Ideology and the Genealogy of Cinematic Realism, The film Journal, Online, Available from internet, http://www.thefilmjournal.com/issue9/dogme95.html Read More