Citizen Kane (1941), An Unseen Enemy (1912), And the Long Take
The long take, when analyzed within the context of a specific narrative, frequently carries baggage of archetypal concepts.
In Orson Welles' Citizen Kane for example, the strict respect for temporal continuity may fuel ambiguity through its dependence on the viewer's capacity to observe, rather than leading by a cut.
In this regard, the long take is associated with the depiction of realism.
These rather lengthy shots-contrasted against formal continuity editing-would also reaffirm cinema's past relationship with theater.
Thusly, in order to effectively realize the usage of the long take (and perhaps form in general), one must not only consider the context in which it is being used, but also the history under which the film was made.
This focus on a film's history draws from the material in D.
W.
Griffith's An Unseen Enemy.
The short film has an overall simplistic editing system that ignores diverse shot variation.
While there is framing that cuts in on key moments (the close up of the gun through the hole), there is also a particular instance that utilizes the long take.
This will not as much serve to reflect abstraction in the manner that Citizen Kane will, but rather reflect a period of cinema confined by the influence of another medium.
To illustrate how a camera technique-specifically the long take-can fully inform the work and one's examination, two scenes from Citizen Kane and An Unseen Enemy will emphasize the need to not only consider the stylistic, but also historical, influence of its function.
The scene of Charles Kane and Mr.
Thatcher arguing over the way the Inquirer is being run begins as an over-the-shoulder two shot and continues for over two minutes without any cut.
Through Welles' denial of the typical Hollywood editing system, there is a type of realism present as Bernstein and Leland invade the scene to interrupt with business related news.
A lack of formal editing to perhaps cut and emphasize their presence would devalue the fluid actions within the mise en scene; Kane's argument with Thatcher is not the sole action.
Yet, the absence of shot/reverse shots during this long take refuses to leave the frontal framing of Kane.
So while the viewer analyzes this dramatic field in time, the long take also emphasizes the dominance of Kane, even in an uninterrupted take.
In D.
W.
Griffith's An Unseen Enemy, the final, medium long shot of the film (with relativity to its general editing pattern) extends for a moderately long time, approximately forty seconds.
Yet unlike Citizen Kane, it seems to mimic something other than realism or character authority.
The framing of the two sisters, brother, and boy against a constant background, rather, shows the best vantage point to view this particular action.
Having been made in 1912 when cinema was still determining its own artistic devices, this long take seems to be a direct reflection of the theatrical stage's fourth wall.
With Citizen Kane, the use of the long take seems heavily associated with Welles' innovative style to convey concepts such as realism and even character dominance.
Yet in Griffith's An Unseen Enemy, the long shot seems more pragmatic and overtly influenced by the form of theater.
Through these two scenes, one can certainly acknowledge the discrepancy that may rise if one analyzes form based only within narrative context.
A respect to technique, however, must also exist with the filmmaker.
For one may reach a quagmire if an overabundance of a certain technique exists in a work.
Such overwrought method may harm the very purpose of its function; these technical elements that exist as archetypal structures to supplement ideas may become meaningless clichés demonstrating nothing other than technical proficiency.
In Orson Welles' Citizen Kane for example, the strict respect for temporal continuity may fuel ambiguity through its dependence on the viewer's capacity to observe, rather than leading by a cut.
In this regard, the long take is associated with the depiction of realism.
These rather lengthy shots-contrasted against formal continuity editing-would also reaffirm cinema's past relationship with theater.
Thusly, in order to effectively realize the usage of the long take (and perhaps form in general), one must not only consider the context in which it is being used, but also the history under which the film was made.
This focus on a film's history draws from the material in D.
W.
Griffith's An Unseen Enemy.
The short film has an overall simplistic editing system that ignores diverse shot variation.
While there is framing that cuts in on key moments (the close up of the gun through the hole), there is also a particular instance that utilizes the long take.
This will not as much serve to reflect abstraction in the manner that Citizen Kane will, but rather reflect a period of cinema confined by the influence of another medium.
To illustrate how a camera technique-specifically the long take-can fully inform the work and one's examination, two scenes from Citizen Kane and An Unseen Enemy will emphasize the need to not only consider the stylistic, but also historical, influence of its function.
The scene of Charles Kane and Mr.
Thatcher arguing over the way the Inquirer is being run begins as an over-the-shoulder two shot and continues for over two minutes without any cut.
Through Welles' denial of the typical Hollywood editing system, there is a type of realism present as Bernstein and Leland invade the scene to interrupt with business related news.
A lack of formal editing to perhaps cut and emphasize their presence would devalue the fluid actions within the mise en scene; Kane's argument with Thatcher is not the sole action.
Yet, the absence of shot/reverse shots during this long take refuses to leave the frontal framing of Kane.
So while the viewer analyzes this dramatic field in time, the long take also emphasizes the dominance of Kane, even in an uninterrupted take.
In D.
W.
Griffith's An Unseen Enemy, the final, medium long shot of the film (with relativity to its general editing pattern) extends for a moderately long time, approximately forty seconds.
Yet unlike Citizen Kane, it seems to mimic something other than realism or character authority.
The framing of the two sisters, brother, and boy against a constant background, rather, shows the best vantage point to view this particular action.
Having been made in 1912 when cinema was still determining its own artistic devices, this long take seems to be a direct reflection of the theatrical stage's fourth wall.
With Citizen Kane, the use of the long take seems heavily associated with Welles' innovative style to convey concepts such as realism and even character dominance.
Yet in Griffith's An Unseen Enemy, the long shot seems more pragmatic and overtly influenced by the form of theater.
Through these two scenes, one can certainly acknowledge the discrepancy that may rise if one analyzes form based only within narrative context.
A respect to technique, however, must also exist with the filmmaker.
For one may reach a quagmire if an overabundance of a certain technique exists in a work.
Such overwrought method may harm the very purpose of its function; these technical elements that exist as archetypal structures to supplement ideas may become meaningless clichés demonstrating nothing other than technical proficiency.
Source...