Modern piracy has been a global issue since the turn of the 21st century as a direct result of the rise in sophisticated, organised groups of pirates attacking ships off the coast of Africa, Asia, and to a lesser extent, South America; holding crews for ransom or taking valuable cargo that is subsequently sold to buyers in pre-arranged agreements (BBC and Coughlan, 2006). This type of piracy is vastly different from the swashbuckling heroic pirate that has traditionally been played by Errol Flynn on film and more recently, had been revived by Johnny Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow in Disney’s Pirates of the Caribbean franchise. However, in examining such traditional representations of piracy on the high seas, Understanding Film Theory 2011 states: “These popular narratives have an underlying moral message. All swashbuckling stories expose the dangers of an all-powerful elite class, which given free rein tyrannises and exploits the less fortunate for materialistic gain” (Etherington-Wright and Doughty, 2011, p. 35). While modern piracy is less glamorous than that shown by Errol Flynn, does it give the filmmaker a platform in their role of propagandist to challenge the political establishment in the same way?

Propaganda is biased by nature, and is used to promote a specific point of view. This essay will analyse the points of view that are conveyed in three films: Tobias Lindholm’s Kapringen (A Hijacking) (2012); Cutter Hodierne’s Fishing Without Nets (2012); and Paul Greengrass’s Captain Phillips (2013). It will examine how the directors may be considered propagandists with a view to assessing the theory that their cinematic products seek to influence public opinion on a topic – in this case modern piracy – projecting the narrative from specific perspectives in order to encourage the audience to think about piracy in very specific ways.

The cinematography of all three movies actively reinforces the directors’ perspectives. Taking Lindholm’s Kapringen first, it is important to note that it was actually shot on a genuine cargo ship, the MV Rozen, that was hijacked off the coast of Somalia in order to establish a realistic environment for the narrative. Also, the telephone conversations between Omar and Peter Ludvigsen were filmed with the actors in Kenya and Demark respectively, again to help with realism and tension. (Times and Olsen, 2013)

The opening scene maximises the impact of the authenticity it provides by framing the character Hartmann against the open sea while he is on the phone to his family. There are several medium close-up shots of him in a similar vein that serve to present him as the main protagonist, whilst drawing attention to the juxtaposition of his life at sea and that with his family, therefore promoting his humanity. Although this introduces the character, it also frames the narrative by providing an environment in which neither the pirates nor the captives are in their own spatial field, instead framing them as displaced (Villarejo, 2013). This actively reinforces the power that those in the office have over the fate of all those on board, and highlights the function of the movie as propaganda.

On the other hand, the cinematography in Hodierne’s Fishing Without Nets deliberately forces a shift in the discussion of modern piracy, presenting it through the eyes of the pirates, who also happen to be poor Somali fishermen with limited prospects and no other way of making a living. In fact, the narrative introduces the pirates from the outset, initially placing them in a small boat with guns that are dwarfed by the size of the ship, before bringing them back to their natural environment. Although the initial shots are cinematic, it appears that the pirates are being interviewed for a documentary as a result of the medium close-up and the way in which they speak to camera. This is juxtaposed with an unsteady camera that follows them to the ship in the next scene. It is also supported by narration from the pirates, who discuss strategy and why they do what they do: “We don’t have to shoot! Only shoot if they don’t co-operate!” (Hodierne, 2012). Using a range of camera angles and shots provides a realism that emphasises the reality of those who feel that they have no choice but to become a “hapless criminal” (Byer et al., 2017). This re-establishes the importance of modern piracy on the political agenda but challenges normal perceptions, thus demonstrating how far the deliberate use of the issue as propaganda may be manipulated by the individual filmmaker.

Editing is also important in the films’ roles as propaganda in conjunction with cinematography. In Kapringen, the camerawork lends a sense of reality to the narrative, following the characters in the office and on the Rosen in a disjointed and often shaky way. However, it is the way in which the takeover of the ship is filmed that highlights the experience of the hostages. Although the takeover is revealed via a phone call to the CEO of the shipping company, Peter Ludvigsen, and is never actually shown in the film, the treatment of those on the ship is depicted as chaotic, with the camera rapidly cutting from Hartmann’s face to their Somali captors, to a medium close-up of the captain being rushed away from the rest. The abrupt cut to the relative silence of the shipping company’s office demonstrates their distance from the events, as does the editing of the scenes in which the CEO negotiates via speakerphone – as mentioned above, these were filmed in real time. This starkly highlights the difference in the players’ perspectives in the drama but also draws attention to Lindholm’s subtle reference to money being worth more than human life.

A similar technique is used in Captain Phillips. Paul Greengrass is well known for using a handheld camera and a frenetic style that disorientates the audience (Buhler and Newton, 2015, pp. 325–349). However in Captain Phillips, the editing serves to deliberately frame the pirates as the archetypal “bad guys”, promoting the West versus the Other formula that has often been associated with race, and perceived as a threat to a specific way of life (Newman, 1996 pp 509-515). Although tonally, Captain Philips is much different, particularly with its pro-US action movie third act (Bradshaw, 2013); it still demonstrates that similar techniques may result in radically different outcomes for an audience, and together with how Captain Phillips himself is portrayed, compared to the many reports that he was far from the hero Tom Hanks portrayed (Child, 2013), it cements Greengrass’ role as a propagandist.

Sound and lighting are also important elements in presenting the films as propaganda and highlighting the directors’ objectives. For example, in Lindholm’s Kapringen, the juxtaposition of the old, poorly lit, rusty cargo ship and the modern, clean, and very bright offices in which the shipping company operates. The lighting highlights the difference between the statuses of the two groups and frames the experiences of negotiation appropriately, casting the rich in control whilst workers are left to suffer as a result of their unwillingness to prioritise them over deals. Sound, on the other hand, is used very effectively by Hodierne in Fishing Without Nets to draw attention to the gulf between the Somali fishermen and those profiting from the cargo ships. The opening shot of Fishing Without Nets, for example, is a long range shot that pans around the cargo ship, framing its stature against the backdrop of the horizon and providing an ominous hint of what is to come as a result of the strong, loud, and extremely tense notes of the soundtrack. Similar music is played over the transportation of the character Abdi through the streets, which highlights the abject poverty they live in. The cinematic language of both films here can broadly be considered to bear a left-wing agenda, specifically in that they lend proper representation to the disempowered by providing an interpretation of actuality (Wells, 2012, pp. 229–260)

In conclusion, the analysis within this essay points to three specific films and by extension, the directors responsible for them, constituting propaganda that is designed to alert their audiences to the problems and issues surrounding modern piracy and the general Western attitude to humanity. Each of the three movies clearly adopts a different position in relation to the factors that underpin piracy and the perspective that is presented. However, this is clearly supplemented by carefully choreographed cinematography and well thought-out editing. For example, the juxtaposition of the Rosen and the offices in Kapringen is effective in highlighting the prioritisation of money over human life, whereas the framing of the narrative in Fishing Without Nets highlights the plight of the Somalis and the reasons why they pursue piracy as a valid course of action. The cinematic language and techniques used emphasise the need to approach piracy in disparate ways; each film pursues a specific agenda that calls on the political establishment to take what they deem appropriate courses of action and in all three films, the West’s general attitude to humanity is generally condemned. Lindholm, Hodierne, and Greengrass have carefully constructed their cinematic products to influence public opinion on the topic of modern piracy and by extension, Western attitudes to humanity and money, encouraging viewers to think about piracy in very specific ways that point back to those in power.

Bibliography

BBC and Coughlan, S. (2006) Rise of modern-day pirates. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5146582.stm (Accessed: 21 February 2017).

Bradshaw, P. (2013) Captain Phillips – review. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/oct/17/captain-phillips-review (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Buhler, J. and Newton, A. (2015) The Oxford handbook of sound and image in digital media. Edited by Carol Vernallis, Amy Herzog, and John Richardson. New York, NY, United States: Oxford University Press.

Byer, A., Dawson, N., Macaulay, S., Lab, M.O.D., Harris, B., Murie, M. and Webmaster (2017) Cutter Hodierne. Available at: http://filmmakermagazine.com/people/cutter-hodierne/#.WKmavxKGPMU (Accessed: 22 February 2017).

Callahan, M. (2013) Crew members: ‘Captain Phillips’ is one big lie. Available at: http://nypost.com/2013/10/13/crew-members-deny-captain-phillips-heroism/ (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Child, B. (2013) Captain Phillips ‘no hero’ in real life, say ship’s crew. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/oct/14/captain-phillips-tom-hanks-real-life-no-hero (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Etherington-Wright, C. and Doughty, R. (2011) Understanding film theory: Theoretical and critical perspectives. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Captain Phillips (2013) Directed by Paul Greengrass .

Fishing without Nets alt. title Jallaabasho shabaq la’aan (2012) Directed by Cutter Hodierne .

Howden, D. (2013) A true-life tale of injustice left trailing in captain Phillips’ wake. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/24/somalia-pirate-film-captain-phillips (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Lindholm, T. (2013a) Kapringen. Available at: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2216240/?ref_=tttr_tr_tt (Accessed: 19 February 2017).

Kapringen (2013b) Directed by Tobias Lindholm .

Newman, K. (1996) The Oxford history of world cinema. Edited by Geoffrey Nowell-Smith. New York: Oxford University Press.

Richard Phillips (merchant mariner) (2016) in Wikipedia. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Phillips_(merchant_mariner) (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Shoard, C. and Barnes, H. (2013) Captain Phillips: Director Paul Greengrass on his thriller starring Tom Hanks – video interview. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/video/2013/oct/16/captain-phillips-paul-greengrass-tom-hanks-video-interview (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Times, L.A. and Olsen, M. (2013) ‘A hijacking’ blurs line between fiction, reality. Available at: http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/23/entertainment/la-et-mn-ca-indie-focus-hijacking20130623 (Accessed: 22 February 2017).

Villarejo, A. (2013) Film studies: The basics. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Wells, P. (2012) Introduction to film studies. Edited by Jill Nelmes. 5th edn. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Citations, Quotes, & Annotations

BBC and Coughlan, S. (2006) Rise of modern-day pirates. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5146582.stm (Accessed: 21 February 2017).

Bradshaw, P. (2013) Captain Phillips: Review. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/oct/17/captain-phillips-review (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Buhler, J. and Newton, A. (2015) The Oxford handbook of sound and image in digital media. Edited by Carol Vernallis, Amy Herzog, and John Richardson. New York, NY, United States: Oxford University Press. pp. 325–349

Byer, A., Dawson, N., Macaulay, S., Lab, M.O.D., Harris, B., Murie, M. and Webmaster (2017) Cutter Hodierne. Available at: http://filmmakermagazine.com/people/cutter-hodierne/#.WKmavxKGPMU (Accessed: 22 February 2017).

Callahan, M. (2013) Crew members: ‘Captain Phillips’ is one big lie. Available at: http://nypost.com/2013/10/13/crew-members-deny-captain-phillips-heroism/ (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Child, B. (2013) Captain Phillips ‘no hero’ in real life, say ship’s crew. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2013/oct/14/captain-phillips-tom-hanks-real-life-no-hero (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Etherington-Wright, C. and Doughty, R. (2011) Understanding film theory: Theoretical and critical perspectives. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. p. 35

Captain Phillips (2013) Directed by Paul Greengrass.

Fishing Without Nets (alt title Jallaabasho shabaq la’aan) (2012) Directed by Cutter Hodierne .

Howden, D. (2013) A true-life tale of injustice left trailing in captain Phillips’ wake. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/24/somalia-pirate-film-captain-phillips (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Kapringen (2013) Directed by Tobias Lindholm .

Newman, K. (1996) The Oxford history of world cinema. Edited by Geoffrey Nowell-Smith. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 509–515

Richard Phillips (merchant mariner) (2016) in Wikipedia. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Phillips_(merchant_mariner) (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Shoard, C. and Barnes, H. (2013) Captain Phillips: Director Paul Greengrass on his thriller starring Tom Hanks – video interview. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/video/2013/oct/16/captain-phillips-paul-greengrass-tom-hanks-video-interview (Accessed: 11 February 2017).

Times, L.A. and Olsen, M. (2013) ‘A hijacking’ blurs line between fiction, reality. Available at: http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/23/entertainment/la-et-mn-ca-indie-focus-hijacking20130623 (Accessed: 22 February 2017).

Villarejo, A. (2013) Film studies: The basics. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Wells, P. (2012) Introduction to film studies. Edited by Jill Nelmes. 5th edn. London, United Kingdom: Ro

Student Number: 514508

Introduction to Film Culture: Assignment 2

Reflection on cinema has explored and expressed contemporary social and moral attitudes over the years.

The sex runs through all lives; it is fundamental to existence as species, and it underpins almost every aspect of human society. What is unique to humans is their morality and sensibilities about sex, and therefore the concept of love and lust is born.

In this essay I look to illustrate how film makers have worked with this morality in relecting the issues of the day.

Brief Encounter Dir David Lean 1945

Brief Encounter released immediately after the second world war, it is a story of the doomed love that grows between housewife Laura Jesson and Dr Alec Harvey after a chance meeting in a railway station café.

Britain of 1945 was moral on the surface were to repress desire that was still a level of “Victorian type values”, but the country had just emerged from 6 years of war and hardship. People lives had changed significantly as the war touched them, either with the sudden death of a loved one or close friend, because you thrust into new situation either as a soldier or as for woman thrown into working in factories and farms. The underlying nature of people was changing but not always on the surface.

The director David Lean and writer Noel Coward with Brief Encounter explores that morality by show a story of an unconsummated love affair conducted by too decent married people who at their heart are conflicted by their feelings. David Thompson is his 2010 Top Ten romantic film alludes that the sedateness of this movie is out of step with the films of the day which their the lust and desire; all with the Hays Code of course, but Brief Encounter is more about a dream of romance.

The screen shots illustrate that they the relationship between Laura and Alec is very much like that of a teenage school romance; dates in the pictures and the sheer pleasure in the faces that they are just in each other company. There is quietness about Noel Cowards script there is no symbolism required to get around the Hays Code; the couple never has sex. There is a more open affair happen on the fringes of the film with the flirting between that station guard and café manageress.

This could be Coward’s way of reflection on his personal life. Coward was very private about his homosexuality throughout his life, whereas in contrast the director David Lean was married many times. Could it be that Coward was writing a parable for a gay relationship in post-war Britain, not just the extramarital affair?

Although, throughout the film, it is evident the couple are disenchanted with you current relationship it does not go into the reason why. We are given a glimpse into Laura’s home life, which seems to perfectly reasonable. The film gives no reason why we should will these too to leave their respective partners which play to the morals of the days and the depiction of Laura with the eye look of an adoring teen help keep the film firmly grounded in the outward morals of the day.

Laura and Alec part at the end of the movie choosing to remain on their current paths although they have clearly fallen deeply in love with each other. The love unrequited and again morals are kept by now allowing the farewell to get too emotional, they final cup of tea is disturbed by an acquaintance and Alec departs with a tap on the shoulder and Laura returning to embrace we husband for being far away.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s Dir Blake Edwards 1960

Based on a novella by Truman Capote tells the love story of Holly and Paul, one an escort and the other the “kept man” of an older married woman.

The film in contrast to the book does not overtly mention that Holly is a prostitute and removes all trace of the pregnancy with Jose’s child and end with the Paul and Holly being together. Morality had changed by 1960 for the baby boomers, not their parents nor the Hayes Code, so these changes were necessary to deal with the mixed morality of the time.

The film employs use of symbolism in the dialogue to lead the audience on a journey to the real mean should they wish to follow it

For example:

“I always get $50 for the powder room” – Holly explains what happens on her dinner dates

“Well is she or isn’t she? Is she or isn’t she….. a phoney?” OJ Berman and Paul discussing

Moreover, below “Do you think she handsomely paid? If had her money I would be richer than she is …” Discussing the stripper breasts and how they would change here life as an escort.

Although she is clearly an escort, the film gives innocence to Holly and allow in contrast to Brief Encounter provides an insight into her background which while not normal like Laura it is not too hard and shown that she still cares for the people she has left behind in the scene below.

The film as a whole is beautiful to watch; the mise en scene is a delight to the eyes. From the opening scene of the taxi pulling up at Tiffany’s; combine with the one-sided love story from the eyes of Paul how no matter what happens he loves Holly cleverly distract the audience from the underlying story of a “golddigger.” It ends with a scene of high emotion when Paul explain to Holly that she is architect of here own troubles and she should let him into her life which brings the story back to an excellent moral conclusion

Breathless Dir Jean- Luc Goodard 1961

Also released in the early 1960’s Jean-Luc Goddard Breathless deal with love and lust much more directly. Freed from the constrains of the Hollywood system and the Hayes Code Goddard was able to produce a film that gives no excuse for its protagonist’s actions.

Michel (Jean-Paul Belmondo) is without redeeming features; he steels from his girlfriend while she is distracted; he ignores Patricia (Jean Seberg) while reading a pinup magazine, and for no reason kills a motorcycle policeman.

Patricia is also amoral she is living a bohemian lifestyle, happy to have a casual relationship with Michel and others. Goddard has not used symbolism to reflect the morality; he is showing it in a very raw way.

Using the mobile camera that was the hallmark of the new wave, the film has the fly on the wall or documentary-style look. The mise en scene and editing are much different to the previous films like the morality it shows it much rawer.

There is some symbolism; although Michel always pesters Patrica for sex, there are no overt sex scenes. The camera does cut away at an appropriate time.

Comparing Breathless and Breakfast at Tiffany’s as contemporaries, Breathless addresses the issues of the day more directly. Breakfast at Tiffanys is flawed in the fact that is disguised the issues in Hollywood wrapping i.e. the beautiful set pieces and happy ending love story.

Moreover, of the three again Breakfast at Tiffany’s is the weakest at dealing with the social issues of the day, although credit is due to bring these matters to the screen if heavily masked, while for all it repression Brief Encounter is reflecting a situation that is still as relevant today as it was them.

Bibliography

pangeaprogressredux (2012) Professor Dreyfus lecture – breathless (À bout de souffle) active & passive nihilism. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th52fhMlsDA (Accessed: 20 September 2016).

Thomson, D. (2009) Have you seen? A personal introduction to 1, 000 films including masterpieces, oddities and guilty pleasures (with just a few disasters). London: Penguin Group UK.

Thomson, D. (2010) Brief encounter: The best romantic film of all time. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2010/oct/16/brief-encounter-romance (Accessed: 21 September 2016).

OCA Photography – Introduction to Film Culture

Assignment 1 – Hero’s and Villains ‘re-made’.

The has been an interesting exercise to watch five movies; three inspired by two of the others and a more interesting decision as to which two to reflect on together with the “Seven Samurai”. It would have been a much easier decision if had have reflect on any three – but I guess that would have drawn everyone to the low hanging fruit of “Yojimbo” and its two offspring. However, I want to reflect on the two I think that have had the most effect on me, “Yojimbo” and “Fistful of Dollars”.

As I have revealed earlier in exercise 1.2, I came to the Seven Samurai as an admirer of the Magnificent Seven and while not wanting to get into comparisons here between those two films it is significant to mention it as it has a bearing on how I viewed Kurosawa’s masterpiece work.

It is evident when you watch the “Seven Samurai” why it has inspired so many filmmakers; not only the recognised re-make the Magnificent Seven but others such as the Guns of Navarone and the Dirty Dozen. The film explores so many themes, from the cultural significance of the Ronin in Feudal Japan to the motivation of individuals and beyond; all wrapped in a package that any blockbuster Hollywood movie now or then would be grateful to have.

What is does have though above all it imitators is its running time, at over hours Kurosawa allows the plot points to develop slowly, the characters to marinate so that they become rounded individuals. It does not rely on an overly dramatic showdown that many of its offspring have, nor is there a “happy ending” of redemption for the group either in an honourable death or survival. No, what Kurosawa is showing in this film is that violence breeds violence and that for a warrior survival can be a form of death. They become obsolete there are no longer required and because of the class systems in feudal Japan they cannot quietly retire into the community, they have saved. The fact that they are ronin available in the first place is because of this class system, and Kurosawa shows that perpetual cycle to great effect in this movie.

The same director shows a different style in Yojimbo, classed as a thriller – the story is less class based and could be easily transported in any period as has been demonstrated with the two remakes we have studied. Here the director has focused on an individual and his mission to rid a town of two feuding gangs. While still set in feudal Japan, it is quite clearly at a period which is contemporary with the American western, as shown with the use of a Colt 45 or similar. The overall feel of the film is more of a western than the thoughtful subtleties of the directors earlier Chanbara masterpiece.

There are much more comic elements, and the score is heavier and more humorous if not cartoon in style, but overall the Kurosawa has pushed the samurai film away from its origins to show more realistically how brutal death can be in particular by a sword. However, unlike the more real characters that he has produced in the Seven Samurai, the hero is more the of the modern day action hero. Seemingly unstoppable and able to single-handedly bring down the “bad guys” no matter what happen to him, which is in nearly every modern day film, although, somehow I am drawn to a comparison to John McClane in Die Hard; how he can defeat the terrorists despite being barefoot.

In “A Fistful of Dollars” Sergio Leone remakes the Yojimbo while bringing a style to the film which pays homage to both Kurosawa and the chanbara and the great blockbuster American Westerns of the likes of John Ford. “A Fistful of Dollars” was the beginning of the Spaghetti Western and Leone had produced a film which was not a shot for shot remake make of Yojimbo nor has it the same tone. I would describe it as a more serious film than it predecessor. Yes, the overall story is the same, but the development of most charictors is less characteristic than Yojimbo, and the direction leads the way the use of extreme close-ups on the actor’s eyes that became a trademark of the spaghetti western.

A Fistful of Dollars is very much a western, and you can see that influence in the wide shots which bring in the landscape – especially when compared back to Yojimbo; mainly set within the claustrophobic surround of a village.

The overall look of Leone film is very similar in feel to both Yojimbo and Seven Samurai, but this achieved differently. Kurosawa makes great use of light and shadow for the dramatic effect his films; shot in black and white and the contrast gives the grittiness and darkness. Whereas “A Fistful of Dollars” is in full colour, but unlike many of it contemporary American Westerns there is a layer of dust over everything as you would expect in the American West – not the shiny bright colours of Hollywood.

Overall I think these two directors over these three movies have made a great contribution to each genre they represent, in Leones case even helping to give birth to the Spaghetti Western. They have transported them to another level for all that followed to look up to whether within the genre or outside. They have spawned many remakes, sequels and homages some less successful than others but they all owe that existence to the three films we have talked about today.