Narrative Voice and Focalization in The Third Man - Movie Review Example

Narrative voice and focalization in The Third Man The Third Man, a British film, was directed by Carol Reed using the screenplay written by the renowned novelist Graham Greene, who subsequently came up with a novella of the same name. Released in 1949, the film starred Joseph Cotten, Orson Welles, Alida Valli and Trevor Howard as principal characters. The film was a commercial as well as a critical success in both its release in UK as well as in USA, where an edited version was released. It is still being appreciated for its atmospheric cinematography with sharp editing cuts, aided by a unique and moody musical score. The film is about an American writer, Holly Martins (played by Joseph Cotten), who visits Vienna in the post World War time to meet his friend named Harry Lime (played by Orson Welles). However, he discovers that Lime has ‘died’ in a road accident, but unconvinced by the scenario surrounding his death, Martins decides to search for the clues and thereby find the real reason for his alleged death. After coming in contact with various characters, Martins learns that Lime is not dead, but has killed another man in his place. He did that to escape from the clutches of the law, and to continue his illegal trade of black marketeering, albeit in a deceptive manner. When one focuses on the film in a deeper way, it provides key perspectives regarding its narrative voice and focalization, and so the focus will be on how these two aspects are communicated in The Third Man. Speaking of narrative voice, the film has two narrators due to an interesting difference between the British and the US version of the film. That is, in the original UK version, as the film starts, it was the British director Oliver Reed who gave the voice over introduction or narration. However, in the US version, producer David O. Selznick re-recorded Reeds own opening narration using the lead American actor Joseph Cottens voice. Although, it is said that Selznick did that to reduce the ‘Britishness’ at the outset itself, when viewed deeply it provides key insights regarding the narrative structure of the film, particularly regarding narrative voice and focalization. It seems that director Reed along with screenplay writer Graham Greene wanted to narrate the film not from the film’s ‘alleged’ male protagonist of Holly Martins, and instead through different characters particularly through the character of Major Calloway (played by Trevor Horward) and Henry Lime. Furthermore, they did not want the narration to start from the internal focalization of Martins. “The narration, which describes the state of Post-War Vienna and introduces Martins’ entrance into the city, is not delivered through the internal focalization of Martins, but rather through the voice of Carol Reed, the director.” (Yanick 2014). This abandoning of first person narration through the main protagonist of the film in a way transforms Martins from being a narrator into the role of being narrated. This change of the default narrator voice or focalization, normally found in film noirs like The Third Man, led critics as well as viewers to suggest that it was done by both Reed and Greene mainly to make Martins’ voice from being a dominant to a subjugated voice. They did that because they wanted to provide an aloof account of Martins’ travails and experiences in Vienna, as he travels to distant parts of the ‘unknown’ city and attempts to unravel the mystery behind his friend Lime’s supposed death. “The spectator is presented, not with Martin’s personal perspective of his own story, but a distanced and impersonal narrative about Martins.” (Yanick 2014). The other probable reason why Martins’ voice was not used as a narrative voice and Martins’ focalization was not done is because Reed and Greene may have intentionally, or if viewed from another perspective, may have inadvertently wanted to subvert some of the key tropes in noir genre, particularly viewing the complete story as well as other characters including their motives through the main protagonist or hero. When this happens, only the perspective of the main protagonist will be visible, with the other characters’ perspectives and motives getting suppressed. (Hibberd 2008). In addition, if the main protagonist is used for narrative voice and for focalization, then his strong attributes will come to the fore, thereby suppressing his negative aspects. It seems that to present Martins as a normal individual, who is not heroic and formidable, Reed and Greene could have weaned away the narrative voice and focalization from him. This was validated by Yanick (2014), who stated that, “The Third Man, becomes less a film centered around a Hardboiled male, central to noir narratives, rather favoring a depiction of a sexually fraught and diminished central figure made up to play the role of hero.” Thus, it is clear that in breaking with the normal custom of noir films as well as ‘normal’ films, the main protagonist of Martins was in a way diminished at the outset itself, by depriving him of narrative voice as well as internal focalization. “Immediately, the film delivers the first coded diminishment of Holly Martins’ character in the opening exposition.” (Yanick 2014). In addition, the film had long narrations as well as passages without the presence of Martins, where other characters were given prominence. This in a way reflects the earlier pointed perspective that, “Martins role as central figure is, if not diminished completely, at least challenged.” (Yanick 2014). This perspective of Reed and Greene adopting a multi-perspective narrative voice and focalization instead of doing it through Martins, gets strengthened further, when one looks at the Greene’ novel version of the film. As mentioned earlier, Greene had already written a basic draft of the novel, The Third Man, which only he adapted to the screen. He adapted it to the screen first, and then only he published it has a novella, and in the novella also he moved the narrative voice and focalization from Martins. That is, in the novel, Greene used Calloway as the narrator, thereby pushing Martins to the sidelines. In that direction, Calloway constantly reasserts his own credibility as narrator by asserting that what the readers read is fact and not fiction. “I have reconstructed the affair as best I can from my own files and from what Martins told me. It is as accurate as I can make it - I havent invented a line of dialogue, though I cant vouch for Martins memory.” (Greene 2010, p.7). Thus, in a way Martins was forced to just ‘exist’ and move in a non-descript manner in the novel version as well. “Instead, he moves through the novel like a poltergeist, dependent in many respects upon Calloway (his avowed enemy through most of the novel) for his mouthpiece and, indeed, his very existence.” (Wert 1974). However, this suppression of Martin’s character, particularly through withdrawal of narrative voice and focalization in film, and shifting to Calloway character in the novel, led to different reactions elsewhere. As discussed earlier, to counter the diminishment of the character of Martins, producer Selznick in contrast to Reed and Greene’s vision and motivation shifted the narrative voice and even a sizable part of focalization back to Martins in the US version of the film. Selznick believed that the Martin’s role in the British version may not be acceptable for the American audiences, thus forcing him to make certain key changes. Selznick edited out all the scenes that portray Martins as an ineffective hero, thereby cutting eleven minutes from the film, and importantly replaced Reed’s opening narration with a first person narration by Martins. (Drazin 2007). This conflict between the director Reed’s and producer Selznick’s vision regarding narrative voice and focalization brings into focus the issue how established hero were depicted in the films in the 1940s. As being discussed, the original British version of the film “stands in opposition to the created image of hardboiled hero, which dominated crime films for the large part of the 1940s.” (Yanick 2014). That is, towards the end of 1940s, as the cultural values began to change, the fabricated screen hero started to lose his hold, which in a way resulted in the crumbling of archetypical noir heroes or male protagonists. Thus, Reed and Greene, in contravention with the noir movies of their times and importantly reflecting the changing cultural values, withdrew the narrative voice and focalization from Martins, and instead provided multi-perspective by narrating through various characters. This depriving of narrative voice and focalization from Martins is also visible in the way casting of the film was done, particularly while casting for the characters of Martins and Lime. That is, when the film was in the production stage and also during its release, Orson Welles was the more charismatic and popular movie star than Joseph Cotton. However, while casting for The Third Man, Welles was given the role of the villain, and also he appears only minimally throughout the film. On the other hand, lesser know Cotton was given the role of the main protagonist. This kind of reversal of roles also validates the earlier perspective that Reed and Greene mainly wanted to deny the narrative voice and focalization to Martins. (Jones and Vice 2010). That is, when viewed from a different perspective, it could be stated that to avoid narrative voice and focalization to the character of Martins, Reed and Greene could have preferred a lesser known actor for that role. This is in contravention with the traditional narrative, where charismatic and popular actors will be selected for the protagonist role, and thereby allowed to have the narrative voice and focalization. This point of view was validated by Palmer (2010), who stated, “The Third Man, in casting the movie star as villain, also uses Welles’ varied personae to reverse expectations of the conventional narrative: casting the charismatic movie star as villain, and casting a man far less imposing in his presence (Joseph Cotten) as the leading man.” This shifting of onus from Martins to others, particularly Lime in this case, was further strengthened by scenes in the movie. It seems by taking away the narrative voice and focalization from Martins, Reed and Greene would have wanted the villain to be the “magnetic source of the film’s allure”, and that is proved by the fact that “Welles does, after all, get all the best lines, many of which he wrote for himself.” (Palmer 2010). This contrasting perspectives regarding Martins and Lime as part of the narrative is also visible in certain scenes particularly through visual techniques. Normally, visual techniques including cinematography, structure of the shots, mise en scène, and also the order and pacing of successive shots could be used to convey the narrative of the film. (Swintice 2000). On those lines, due to pacing and structure of shots, Lime is shown to make fleeting or broken line of appearances and disappearances, with viewers expressing opinion that he sort of played a cameo role in his own film or story. On the other hand, Martins appear omnipresent, featuring in majority of the scenes, although he is not the narrator. This viewpoint was put forward by Misek (2007), who stated that narratively too, for most of the film Lime remains an absent presence, existing in other people’s descriptions of him, while Holly on the other hand, “is tied to real locations, moving through streets whose existence is documented by the camera.” From the above analysis, it can be concluded that director Oliver Reed in association with the writer Orson Welles have used narrative voice and focalization in different ways, in contrast to the set conventions. In breaking with the custom of assigning the narrative voice and focalization to the main protagonist, Reed and Welles denied those roles to Martins. Although, producer Selznick gave the narrative voice to Martins in the American version of the film, in the original British version, he was deprived of it. Furthermore, Reed and Welles directly and indirectly gave it to other characters like Calloway and even Lime, thereby providing a multi-perspective approach. References Drazin, C., 2007. Behind The Third Man. Available from http://www.criterion.com/current/posts/1020-behind-the-third-man(accessed on April 30, 2014) Greene, G., 2010. The Third Man and the Fallen Idol. Random House. Hibberd, L., 2008. Studying The Third Man. Auteur. Jones, WE and Vice, S., 2010. Ethics at the Cinema. Oxford University Press. Misek, R., 2007. Wrong Geometries in The Third Man. Available from http://www.rouge.com.au/rougerouge/third_man.html(accessed on April 30, 2014) Palmer, L., 2010. Criterion Files #64: The Third Man. Available from http://filmschoolrejects.com/features/criterion-files-64-the-third-an.php(accessed on April 30, 2014) Reed, O and Greene, G., 1949. The Third Man. British Lion Films. Swintice, R., 2000. Visual Meaning in The Third Man. Available from http://www.netribution.co.uk/features/essays/meaning_third_man.html(accessed on April 30, 2014) Wert, WFV., 1974. Narrative Structure in The Third Man. Literature/Film Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 4 Yanick, J., 2014. Issues of Whiteness, Race and Sexuality in Carol Reed’s The Third Man. Available from http://www.joeyanick.com/2014/03/09/film-essay-drying-flowers-limp-string-depictions-burden-maintaining-whiteness-post-war-cinema/(accessed on April 30, 2014) Read More