Table of contents Introduction 3 Mission 4 Method 4 Theory 5
|
|  Yüklə 258 Kb.
|
Epidemic’s stylistic structureA film’s narrative structure and style is two sides of the same coin. In the typical mainstream movie, the style contributes to a clear representation of the plot, which provides the audience with the best possibilities to create a coherent story. However, when dealing with an art film, the opposite occurs where the style will often be a significant and clear contributor to the film. While Epidemic is a part of a trilogy created by Trier, the film differs from his previous films, which is seen through the low budget-style that dominates the majority of Epidemic. Most of the scenes are shot with a 16 mm handheld camera providing the movie with a certain low budget look. This, when a certain aesthetic strategy is removed, another takes its place and furthermore, the film’s expression becomes a natural occurrence based on the results of circumstances on which Epidemic was created – the idea of the movie was produced on a wager with one condition. Epidemic was to be produced on a budget of one million Danish kroner and even in the 1980s that was considered extremely low, because the average Danish feature film at the time was on a budget eight times higher. Additionally, the idea of creating low-budget films as an artistic experiment became a central theme in Trier’s later movies which also resulted in the 1995 Dogme manifesto where restrictions and “vows of chastity” would help to create new ideas within film.51 As such Epidemic can be seen as the beginning of Trier’s revolt against the film industry and criticism of the System within film business. On the basis of this, Trier becomes an interesting ‘author’ in connection with Andersen’s theory on the Postironical where Trier would seemingly prove to be considered a Postironist – the aspect of this is something I will return to later on. MetafictionThroughout the film, the viewer is constantly presented with meta effects such as microphone tripods and lamps visible in many of the frames. Furthermore, the sound of the 16 mm camera can often be heard and all these aspects serve as self referenced meta functions creating a form of ‘verfremdungseffekt’52 telling us we are watching something recorded and staged. In terms of metafiction, the film can be said to operate with two stories on two different levels; To separate the two, one should be defined as the fictive level and the other as the documentary level. Through the aesthetic structure it becomes easy for the viewer to distinguish the two levels due to the fact that the story where we follow Niels and Lars is filmed with a handheld 16 mm black/white camera giving us the impression of a documentary. “Det er siden 1960erne blevet almindeligt at benytte håndholdte kameraer, der videregiver de rystelser, der fremkommer, når kameramanden bevæger sig. Håndholdte kameraoptagelser afgiver således subjektcentrerede informationer. Fordi bruger af håndholdt kamera i begyndelsen særligt blev benyttet til dokumentar og reportage, opfattes håndholdt kamera ofte som en særlig realistisk teknik (…) Når f.eks. dogme-instruktører sværger til det håndholdte kamera, er det formodentlig udtryk for et ønske om en realistisk æstetik.”53 The fictive level that follows the story they are writing is filmed with a 35 mm black/white camera, which gives us a more clean and filmic perception. As such, the film shifts between two expression or two types of film language that consists of a perfectioned style and a raw, low-budget style. A Postmodern filmFrom reviewing Epidemic it becomes apparent that the immediate story is a film about the creation of a film and as such it is a meta film: a film that proclaims itself as fiction and makes the audience aware of this. The aspect of metafiction is at the same time a highly postmodern element because it serves as a demonstration of fiction as a theme. And this is exactly the case in Epidemic because it explicitly deals with its own status as fiction and at the same time reflects on the relationship between fiction and non-fiction. It becomes even more evident that this film shows strong aspects of being a postmodern film. This notion is supported by applying Rose/Christiansen’s statement concerning Postmodernism in film. Rose and Christiansen have in their theory book listed a number of common postmodern characteristics within the media of film and TV, Et postmoderne værk vil ofte være kendtegnet ved at:
What is interesting about this list is that Epidemic displays almost all of the characteristics mentioned. In the film there is a clear lack of narrative logic, where the audience is presented with two different stories. In the final scene everyone succumbs to the disease and Lars is the only one left alive and as such the film has an ambiguous ending and is without a definite conclusion, where the viewer is unsure of its meaning. The story combines different themes and strategies, which is seen through its use of irony, metafictive elements and distancing. It is also noticeable how the two main characters seem to be depicted as human machines who distance themselves from the rest of the world. This is also further perceived by the notion of what Rose/Christiansen describes as misunderstood expectations. An example of this can be seen in the scene with the actor Udo Kier, who Lars and Niels find boring despite the fact that he is telling them a horrific story from his own life. This scene also becomes interesting in connection to the Postironical which is an aspect I will return to later on. The last characteristic on the list mentioned above also proves to exist in Epidemic. The bubonic plague that slowly infects the world around the two main characters becomes increasingly apparent as the story develops, and through both narrative and stylistic elements, the film portrays a restless atmosphere. On the basis of this, Epidemic becomes a classic example of the postmodern film by containing these characteristics. Within this perspective a paradox exists, due to the nature of Postmodernism that claims emancipation from the System and is not to be determined by any norms. All in all films that are marked with postmodern aesthetics will not seem especially coherent and additionally they will not be able to create a clear picture of any cultural state. Conversely, it provides the viewer with several themes, revised language usage and symbolism to work with. The film focuses on the metafictive film’s will to thematize itself and the world in one movement, and by doing this, it points to its own staging. An example of this can be seen in a humorous scene where Niels and Lars are talking about the possible dramaturgy. We see them drawing a line on the wall in Niels’ apartment and Lars says, “Omkring to tredjedele henne ... her må vi lave en eller anden form for drama ... på det tidspunkt vil folk kede sig ... De vil sikkert kede sig før, men på det her tidspunkt vil de kede sig så meget, at de overvejer at gå”55. In addition of being metafictive, they are also being ironic about the common demands of a movie’s dramaturgy and structure. Furthermore, the scene becomes even more ironic because Lars’ statement seems to predict the dramaturgy of the film, the audience are actually watching. |