Binary opposition is the two-term conflict. We usually would see the good side
and the bad side in almost every film or the different attitudes toward one thing. That
creates the story. This kind of technique is help the audience quickly understand the
outline. Even he/she doesn’t finish the film, but he/she will know that the director
want s to say a story about the structure like “Yes, I know it is a story about car
accident” Also, the audience would know which side they should believe, their
emotion could be properly located. It would be easy for them to recognize the
character and the ideology. In “Shane,” the two opposite is pretty clear that Shane and
the homesteaders are the good side and the cowboys are bad side. Ryker wants to own
the whole land and threats the residents to give way. In the first half of the film, we
see Shane comes across the land and arrives at John’s home, and we know that he is a
cowboy and intends to stay. And the next shot, we see Ryker and his boys also come
to this place, tell him the land problem and they have quarrel. Shane returns to the
house and help him to fight back the swashbuckler. And we know instantly that we
have to support the family and Shane. Ryker is the evil side.
The second one is the structuralism. It emphasizes the sameness in films, and
“see how they fit onto or help to define a genre, style, or movement” instead of caring
about the difference in every film. There are some examples. The first one is to
establish the conflicts. The binary opposition is often used. Or the disruption of
equilibrium is also common one. There is a pattern. When the opposing force disrupts
the plenitude, the seesaw progress occurs between unifying force and the disrupting
force. And in the end, there would be a new kind of plenitude. But the new one is not
necessary same with the original one. Sometimes this kind of result would generate
more emotion and male the audience more impressive. “Shane” is the example. We
see the Starretts is a happy family-The strong and brave husband, the gentle and pretty
wife and the outgoing little John. And they own a peaceful life. That is the state of
equilibrium. And Ryker is the disruptive force. Though Shane’s help, they cast out the
evil power. But we see the end is the little John looking Shane leaving. Why? The
guns here stand for the badness and that are the original power of the cowboys. So
when Shane teaches the little John how to shoot, Emile was angry. I think she is the
symbol of the land, which is tended to be peaceful, steady, gentle and not quarrelsome.
But the way Shane solves the problem in the end is to with the gun. He knows that he
has to use the bloody method because the “enemy” is s killer. That is why he prevents
Joey to go to town. Not only he knows Joey could not win Johnson but also he wants
him to belong to the “nature of land.” But the price is that he has to leave cause the
guy with guy could not belong to the land. Though the situation comes to the
equilibrium, Shane has to go. That is the difference. It is a misery because we know
Shane has tried hardy to change himself, but it is all in vain. Little John’s innocence
and the “sorry” floats in the air, just to enhance the sadness.
The third one is codes and convention. At the beginning, we must understand
that what the film involves is not only the text (the story) but also the social context.
“The social influence establishes the sets of codes and conventions which make
communication between the audience and the film possible. Convention is consistent
of numbers of codes. And the codes in the film probably are the gestures, the accents
and the styles. These hints in the film combine together and become the convention.
In some early films, women are shaped like a supportive role, not the main character.
In “Searcher,” the females are weak and need men’s help, to be rescued. In “Shane,”
the wife Emile is framed in the window, and in the house. The reason might be the
conventional value toward women which women are weak and inferior. In
“Casablanca,” the special light for Lisa is one example of convention. The soft light
and the close up make her face more beautiful and attractive.
The last one is the genre. It includes the conception and the codes; rather, it is the
system of codes. Genre helps the audience to understand the film and recognize the
context. We often mentions about the western films, and action films, the romance
films, and so on. It means when we watch the western films, for instance, we would
expect the cowboys, the gunfights, or the Indians. In “Shane,” why don’t they call the
police when there are quarrels? Because the police station is too far that slow help is
no help. We accept this for that this is the western film, and the land is too large.
Romance films, we expect to see the lover kissing. The expectation is from the genre,
and it is not satisfied, the audience would NOT feel pleased, just like kids always like
the happy ending in the fairy tales. After seeing “Casablanca,” I feel there seems to be
missing something. Of course I know it is a good film and the story also great. But
there must to be something wrong. I realize that though Rick’s love is great and
touching my heart, there are seldom shots about the lover. Even though they have ever
in the bar or in Rick’s room, most time I see is that they talk rationally or argue. There
is little intimacy between them. I know it is a love story, but it seems not to match my
expectation. I was typically controlled by the genre. However, I think that is
reasonable because the background is under war, and if there is magic love, it would
somehow realistic. And the war makes the society anxious, and use the way to express
the love perhaps is better than what I think, as a secular audience.