Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Charlie Chaplan - The Great Dictator
The Great Dictator was Charlie Chaplin's first dialogue picture. Discuss some of the conventions of the play that you believe advances the audience understanding of the film. Use some terminology from your handouts on cinema. Discuss various components of cinema and relate it to this film. How does this film compare to what we view in cinema today?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In "The Great Dictator" I think that some of the most important aspects of the film were translation and language, ambiance, and camera angle.
ReplyDeleteThe first thing that I believe helped the audiences understanding of the film was the voice of the women while Charlie Chaplin gave a speach in German. There was really no way to understand what it was that he was saying, so the english translation by the woman was most helpful. Also, while he speaks in German, Chaplin often uses the words wiener schnitzel, a type of food. Though he could be mentioning a type of German cuisine, it is unlikely that during his speech as a dictator that he was speaking of food. He frequently snorts and coughs, poking fun at the German language. This helps the audience understand that "The Great Dictator" is a comedy.
There were many different types of ambiances in this film, all creating different moods to suit the scene. Towrads the beginnging of the film while Hynkel is in command you get a sense of power as you watch, often he seems to be in complete control. However, if you watch a scene featuring the barber in the Ghetto you feel pity for the jews. Later, while the two dictators fight with each other everything is amusing, contributing to the comedy. The start of film is rather pointless, this leads us the serious aspect that gives us an understanding of what it is Chaplin is mocking, and then it returns to comedy.
The film uses a direct camera angle while Hynkel gives his speeches, this makes it seem like he is talking directly towards us, giving his orders straight to the audience. There is nothing extremely complex, the camera is always focused on the main action in a scene. This allows the audience to see what it is the scene is about and help them to pay attention to the important aspects.
The Great Dictator was a significant step in Charlie Chaplin’s career. Introducing dialogue into the film really helped increase the entertainment and comprehension value. The conventions that I believe advanced the audience’s understanding of the film are obviously dialogue and characterization.
ReplyDeleteThe dialogue in The Great Dictator helped the audience keep up with the plot. Hynkel’s rants and shouting in German served the purpose of not only revealing the setting of the play, but also his dominating position of power. One with basic knowledge of world history could also come to the conclusion that the storyline was based on the events of World War II in Europe based on the foreign dialogue spoken by Hynkel. The dialogue was easy to understand, and therefore kept the audience’s interest.
Characterization also helped the audience have a good understanding of The Great Dictator. The appearance of Hynkel with his military uniform and mustache allowed the audience to make the connection of him to Adolf Hitler. Also, the dictator of Bacteria, Napaloni, is a pun on the name Benito Mussolini, the Fascist dictator of Italy.
The camera angle of this film is usually zoomed out, showing full body shots instead of facial shots. The exception to this is Hynkel’s speeches, where the camera shows his face only. There is also no music in the film, reflecting the transitional period of moving from silent film to film with music and dialogue.
The film is similar to today’s cinema in the fact that nearly all films of today have dialogue. The film is also modern in that it has a central problem of the Jewish barber being prosecuted and sent to a prison camp. The problem is solved with his escape. The Great Dictator is different from films today with it being black and white, and lacking music of any sort.
Ryan
ReplyDeleteI like your take on the film. You point out the camera angle which of course is a very important part of film making. I can't imagine how the director must not only be in charge of how characters will play their roles, but imagine what the director of any film must take responsibility for. It's good to know that you are incorporating some of our reading on this film into your discussion - for instance, you mention that there is no music in the film, relecting the transitional period of moving from silent film to that with music and dialogue. Good job.
The Great Dictator, though surrounding a very heavy subject, is still one of Charlie Chaplin's great comedies. Though the comedy did slightly decrease in sections of the film, it is still hilarious.
ReplyDeleteI think the most obvious conventions used in this movie was the use of dialogue. Imagine if the film did not contain dialogue and completely relied on gestures and some remedial sounds, would the viewer be able to comprehend what was happening? The dialogue made it easier for the viewer to understand what was happening in the film. Also, the way Adenoid Hynkel (Hitler like dictator) would almost mock the German language added to the comedy. Even if the viewer did not understand even the tiniest bit of German, you could tell that most of it was just dynamic diction and words of German foods like "sauerkraut." Also, the dialogue played an important role in the end when the Jewish barber and Hynkel switch roles accidently. The soliloquy type of speech given towards the end of the film of the barber speaking out against the crimes against the Jews and what not is a very important spoken aspect of the film, and without it the film would not have had as profound of an impact.
Another convention used in this film was the head-shot. A head-shot is when the character is filmed from the neck up which are used to intensify the character's reaction to an event. This is extremely evident in the speech given at the end by the Jewish barber, like mentioned above. This close-up to the character allows for greater depth and makes the viewer really focus on what is being said, without being distracted by his body language or the background. The mis-en-scene in the film was also important. The way the cobwebs and disarray of the barber shop once the Jewish man returned made the viewer understand that he had not been there in quite some time. Also, the placement of the so called "nazi symbol" used in the film was placed strategically above the desk of the dictator as to draw attention to the magnitude of the dictatorship happening in Tomania. The food on the buffet style table during the quarrel of Napaloni and Hynkel was placed tactically as to make the cometic "food fight" scene very enjoyable.
This film is different from films we see today mostly by the amount of graphics and visual effects. It was very prominent that when the airplane was flying in the air that it wasn't actually flying. In today's films it would look so good -possible even three-dimensionally jump out at the viewer- that it would seem like it was real. The use of background music, scores, and soundtracks is also seen in today's films unlike this earlier film. Another change would obviously be color instead of the black and white used in The Great Dictator.
Kat,
ReplyDeleteI liked you comment about the ambiance of the film. I had not really paid attention to it much while I was actually watching the film, but now that you mention it I realize what an important role it played in the film. The mood allowed the viewer to feel something through the entire film. I also enjoy that you picked up on the mention of German foods in his speech. I would also have to agree that the film did start out rather pointless. I honestly didn't even understand why this was significant to see at first, but now I actually wish to watch it again.
Ryan,
I liked the connections you made of the characterizations of Hynkel and Hitler. The mustache and the uniform really allowed the viewer to see Hynkel as someone of the same power as Hitler. I also would agree with the lack of music in the film. I did not pick up on it reflecting the transitional period, but I'm glad you pointed it out so now I know.
Kathryn,
ReplyDeleteI would agree with some of your points including your views on camera angle and language. However, I did not get the connection between the ambiances of the film helping the audience's understanding, unless you were not trying to make that point? Along with being a comedy, I feel that The Great Dictator is a slightly less intense version of the times in the early to mid 1940s during World War II in Europe. There is certainly a serious side as well.
Sophie,
I do agree with most of your comments. As I stated in my post, I believe dialogue is crucial to the film's development, along with mis-en-scene. The head shot is also an interesting and evident part of the film. I never thought of the head shot as being helpful to the audience's understanding, but I realize it may have some truth to it. I am glad that you now see my point on the transitional period :)
Being Chaplin's first film with actual dialogue, the film "The Great Dictator" retains many of the same conventions as silent films. The first convention that I find relevant is something that was very important in silent film, which is costume. Silent films required things such as costumes and props in order to establish a setting and characterization without using dialogue. Since it was written during the transitional time of silent to "talkie" film, "The Great Dictator" incorporates the use of costume as a way of telling us about the character and time period, whereas films today might not focus so much on such an aspect. For example, the military uniforms of "Tomania" are nearly identical to Germany's in the late 1930's and early 1940's, after which they are parodied. This immediately communicates to the audience that Tomania and its dictator Hynkel are a direct reference to Nazi Germany and Hitler. Another example of costume elaborating a character is in the case of Hannah, the young Jewish woman. She is rather disheveled-looking and messy until the barber cleans her up, which serves as a way to show not only her own but the whole Jewish community's financial and social state.
ReplyDeleteThe other convention of film used to advance the story to the audience is the use of long, drawn-out gags in which no dialogue is spoken, only action accompanied by music. Though these comedic bits seem to take forever, they are very rarely used in contemporary film. They are used as comic relief and convey to the audience that the movie is not completely serious.
(sorry, my computer crashed while typing this the first time)
ReplyDeleteI believe that the fact that it was his first film that truly included dialogue was seriously important. While Chaplin was a person who could remain animated and use huge gestures to convey his thoughts, an entirely new dimension was added at the introduction of this feature.
His previously comical reactions were changed into something completely different as he was able to use words to truly give people an image of what waqs going on. This was new for him, being that he had never even had the desire to speak on camera before. It allowed people to feel the emotion he wanted them to rather than simply be guessing. It also maade the whole production more powerful to the masses.
I think one of the funniest things was Sydney Chaplin's observation in the movie that Charlie could pick up any language's tone just by listening to it. This is evident in his use of more popular words such as sauerkraut and schnitzel in his speeches. They were utter nonsense but packed a punch because of how he was able to do it.
This really applies to modern day films in the area of emotion. I can personally say that whenever people speak a certain way in a film, I feel a plethora of different feelings. Its the way people phrase things that truly makes the movies masterpieces.
Sophie, I agree with what you say in the effect that the way Chaplin maade Hynkle so much like Hitler turned the whole movie into a much more comical thing. It was able to turn a fearsome man into a complete fool. I picture Hitler dancing with a balloon or having a food fight and all fear for him simply leaves me.
Sam, I never realized how important costumes were until I read what you wrote. But really, had Hynkle not worn a traditional German outfit and the barber not a military uniform, most people would not have understood what exactly was going on. In a world where gestures took foremost importance, the costumes were certainly second.