Links Between the Opening and Closing Scenes
advertisement
Analysis of the Opening Scenes Camera Action Sound Wide EST shot – deep focus; SLOW PAN and slight zoom // LS: his POV of students; same SLOW PAN // WIDE EST // Wood-panelled lecture room, Helinger at lectern, hands in pockets; students around tables Mathematicians won the war. Mathematicians broke the Japanese codes and built the A-bomb. MS // Nash, absorbed in own thoughts MCU // Helinger issues challenge MCU // Nash, looks up but out of the corner of his eyes (instant reaction) Hansen, sitting on a table; he turns to stub out a cigarette and notices Nash Nash (same shot). We can see him thinking. MS, Nash's POV // MCU; SLOW ZOOM in on him; holds // students (Sol with cigarette); Nash at back of room – he stares at floor in contrast to attentiveness of others Helinger continues . . . in medicine or economics, in technology or space, battle lines are being drawn… To triumph, we need results, publishable, applicable results. Who among you will be the . . . next Einstein? Welcome to Princeton, Gentlemen. music swells Nash clearly identified as the central figure the camera picks him from the other students – he is at the apex of a triangle, and repeats Helinger’s position in reverse. The corner of the blackboard points to him cf. Helinger. underlined by his isolation, his self-absorption; cut of by isolation, empty chair Hansen looks at him character qualities: self-absorbed, introspective; sense of his mind working; obsessively neat hair, hands crossed though they work a little; bow tie; reaction when Einstein mentioned = ambition; alone, even isolated, but not uncomfortable contrast with Helinger: relaxed, hand in pocket, personal address: “Like you.” Contrast with Hansen: sitting on desk = confidence, arrogance(?); golden boy – fair haired, handsome, relaxed, confident, smoking Setting golden brown colours, earthy, golden light – warm, nostalgic a "Golden Age" all male, tweed jackets, ties; wooden tables, chairs, wood panelling; smoking; blackboard slow, gentle, even soothing camera work reinforces this mood. This film is to be trusted; there will be no surprises. SLOW ZOOM on Helinger but keeps its distance; slight sense of unease in the way it travels? students casually around tables (rather than the formality of desks); some are smoking; tweed jackets, ties = more formal than today – reinforces screen text that established time and place. Hansen and Sol – the fellow students that feature most in the later sections of the film, are identifiable. Post-production film title = Times New Roman font = conservative, simple, unsurprising, solid, reliable place and time given = facts music = orchestral reinforces sense of nostalgia. Very calm and relaxed cf. camera work 37 Scene 2 inpoint: BCU // TILT UP // cut glass with light reflecting from and through it along sleeved arm to Nash's intent face WIDE EST // golden light continues PULL BACK to include a larger group // Nash alone at table in the campus; social groups mingle Two students cross in front, talking LS // Bender, Neilson approach the punch bowl; Nash walks into shot from an angle on the left Nash CU // CU - Nash's POV // CU – POV shot SFX // PAN (SFX) // Neilson's tie – light emphasises its contours and patterns Nash lifts glass; light patterns on the table CU // across light to slices of orange to punch bowl to settle on Neilson's tie; brilliant light effect as the patterns coincide Nash, smiling MS // Nash (back view), Bender, Neilson MCU; over shoulder / Nash MS // Nash (back view), Bender, Neilson holds out hand, introduces himself. Nash shakes hands with Nielson. Bender leans forward with his hand MS, THREE SHOT // MCU, over shoulder // Nash; WIDE three shot // CU // MCU // MCU // Nash shakes hands; Sol arrives // Nash, moving awkwardly Sol, Nash just in shot; Hansen arrives from behind Sol Nash shakes Sol's hand CU // CU // Hansen, cheerful, friendly Nash WIDE // CU // WIDE, LS // Hansen hands his glass to Nash. Nash, nonplussed Whole group around punch bowl table. (There are no waiters there at all – and Hansen knows who Nash is – we saw him look at him in class) CU // Nash theme music Nn: It's not enough Hansen won the Carnegie Scholarship. B: No, he has to have it all for himself. It's the first time the Carnegie Prize has been split. Hansen's all bent. Nn: He's got his sights set on Wheeler Lab, MIT's military think tank. They're only taking one this year. B: Hansen's used to being picked first. Nn: Yeah. He's wasted on maths. B: He should be running for President. N: There could be a mathematical explanation for how bad your tie is. laughter N: Thank you. Neilson, symbol cryptography. B: Neils here broke a Jap code. Helped rid the world of fascism. At least that's what he tells the girls, eh, Neils? The name's Bender. Atomic physics. And you are? Sol: Am I late? (cuts off Nash's answer) Oh, hi Sol, Richard Sol. H [OS]: The burden of genius. There he is. So many supplicants and so little time. Mr Sol. How are you, sir? [OS] Ah. Bender. B: Nice to see you. Congratulations, Mr Hansen. H: Thank you. I'll take another. N: Excuse me? H: Thousand pardons. I assumed you were the waiter. B: Play nice, Hansen. Sol: Nice is not Hansen's strong suit. H: An honest mistake. N: Well, Martin Hansen. It is Martin, isn't it? 38 over shoulder // CU // Hansen Nash CU, POV // CU // Hansen Nash, looking at ground, knuckles on forehead CU, POV // MS, THREE SHOT // Hansen, silent, uncomfortable Nash, Sol, Hansen. Nash walks away, his final knuckle to forehead being treated by Sol as a salute; the group reforms Hansen As Nash walks away, he looks back briefly, loiters, looks around CU // LS // H: Why yes, John, it is. N: I assume you're getting quite used to miscalculation. I've read your pre-prints - both of them. The one on Nazi ciphers and the other one on non-linear equations. And I am supremely confident that there is not a single seminal or innovative idea in either one of them... Enjoy your punch. Snickers of laughter (- at Nash or at Hansen's discomfiture?) H: Gentlemen, meet John Nash [OS] - the mysterious West Virginia genius. The other winner of the distinguished Carnegie Scholarship. Introduces the characters by name, as they introduce themselves – and finally Nash himself. Important exposition material supplied – Hansen’s ambition, Nash’s fascination with shapes and patterns Establishes Hansen as Nash's chief antagonist – and suggests an ill nature that is not borne out in the film. (Is there ever a really nasty person in a Ron Howard film?) Also that Hansen is a formidable mathematician. Bender and Neilson would both know what Wheeler Lab is – this is information for the audience. The light effect on the tie is the first of a series of motifs that visually replicate Nash's ability to see solutions in a flash of inspiration. Plus his tendency to see the world in patterns. Contrast between Nash and his fellow students is established – dress, behaviour, ease of social interaction. Nash established as an outsider. These young men all know one another well. Bender uses an affectionate abbreviation for Neilson. Hansen knows who Nash is; the others do not. Nash throughout fails to meet the eyes of the others; his suit is just wrong – he lacks the casual elegance of the rest. However, he is not overtly uncomfortable in his aloneness; he is quite relaxed – hand in pocket etc – and not overly embarrassed by Hansen’s joke. Nash’s first speech – about the tie – is clever, engaging. Helps to engage our interest and sympathy. Note the makeup on Crowe to make him look youthful. Scene 3 WIDE EST; slight tilt up to follow Nash // MCU // Female vocals – playing on Nash's record player: "Motets". LS; Zoom in to LS // CU // High angle POV // CU // FAST PAN, POV // MS // Nash's shadow precedes him up the steps; he walks into shot and up Nash pushes his desk towards and past camera to the window. Nash looks out window. Nash at window students below, in groups Nash recognises his aloneness LS Charles entering with large suitcase Nash by window MS // Charles stops music C: Oh, God, no. 39 [OS] cough; Ch: Oh Christ C: The prodigal roommate arrives. N: Roommate? MS // Nash by window MS // MS // Charles puts case on couch, sits down, takes off shoes. Nash by window MS // Charles takes off shirt MS // MS to MCU // Nash by window Charles unpacking; walks towards camera, full lit. Nash by window Charles Nash by window, holds out hand, says nothing Nash by window a ballgame is in progress MCU // CU // MS // LS // high angle LS - his POV out window; PULL FOCUS music slows to s stop. C: Did you know that having a hangover . . . is not having enough water in your body to run your Krebs cycles. Which is exactly what happens when you're dying of thirst. sound of shoe dropping So, dying of thirst / slap of braces / would probably feel pretty much like the hangover that finally bloody kills you. John Nash? N: Hello. C: Charles Herman. Pleased to meet you. to his hand and pen, writing maths in the pane Look at the light effects in this scene. Charles remains fully lit, without shadow, in contrast to Nash who is much more shadowed, almost chiaroscuro. Charles appears at the moment Nash acknowledges to himself how isolated he feels. Unlike Nash, who is socially awkward and clumsy, Charles – like Hansen - is assured, talks easily, is socially adept, friendly and likeable. He is fair, with a halo of curly blond hair – like an angel? After Charles arrives, he controls the action. Nash stands and watches him, with little interaction at this stage. This sets a pattern for later – Charles is always more sure of himself, more relaxed, often in charge. Charles’ conversation is almost ‘scientific’ – the sort of thing Nash would imagine a verbally adept student to warble on about. Charles is English. The part was not written to be English but when Paul Bettany was cast, it seemed a good idea. Ron Howard comments that many of the old East Coast families – Nash came from one – deep down wish they were British, so for Nash to have a British friend made sense. Overall These three scenes (up to the maths on the window) take about 4 minutes, 38 seconds, and contain 64 cuts . The first scene lasts 55 seconds, with 9 shots; the next 2 minutes, 30 seconds with 34 shots; the next 83 seconds with 21 shots. This is an unobtrusive editing style and sets a relatively leisurely pace. Compare the opening sequence in Baz Luhrmann's Moulin Rouge: the first scene of 5 minutes, 18 seconds contains 211 cuts. This averages out to each shot lasting 1.5 seconds. Howard's shots last on average 4.34 seconds each. Apart from establishing shots, the predominant shots are CU and MCU – appropriate in a character-based film. All shots are linked by cuts; this will change when the delusional world gets stronger and dissolves and fades are used frequently. The warm, nostalgic golden light floods all exterior scenes; in Nash's study, the contrast between Nash and Charles is highlighted by lighting effects. 40 Detailed Analysis: the Chase Scene The scene lasts 2 minutes, 11 seconds, but will take at least an hour, probably longer, to analyse in this much detail in class. I suggest selecting short segments only. All links are CUTS, although some are unobtrusive – low light suggests fades. The hand-held camera used throughout creates jerky, often blurred, shots All is lit in blue light; colour is monochromatic – blue-black/steel grey The music, which continues throughout the entire scene, is relatively subdued, reflecting Nash's emotional state rather than the dramatic music that would usually accompany a scene like this. camera BCU // CU // BCU // CU – low angle // high angle ELS // BCU – fuzzy focus CU LS – from outside gate CU LS, his POV CU BCU – Nash's POV MS Fast PAN MCU TWO SHOT BCU – through back window LS – his POV BCU CU CU his POV MCU – FAST PAN to Parcher (his POV) Nash's POV, PAN across to (jerky camera) action pink numbers glow against blue Nash, frightened; blue glow taps number pads cf. phone Nash, frightened; blue glow; startled, jerks upright, turns away gates open – steel grey colour (monochromatic); shadows, raindrops text: CAMBRIDGE, MA – OCTOBER 1954 Nash walks through gates, precede by his long shadow (moonlight?) his hand holding the envelope; box in background Nash's face as he puts envelope in (unseen); he turns away he runs back towards gate which is slowly closing; gets through just in time Nash a car emerges from the darkness, its lights illuminating the trees behind it Nash – frightened front of car – silver-white light; number plate: US Government 73864D (= diplomatic plates) Parcher – head framed by car window, in car Nash runs to car; bars behind him lit Nash gets into car; Parcher watches; car takes off with a jerk Nash looks back, barely distinguishable in the light a car swings round corner behind them Nash, partly obscured Parcher turns to Nash – chiaroscuro effect – shoulders & hat dark, face lit Nash, eyes lit car back window, shattered by bullet blurred Nash huddles down, terrified, half lit (shot lasts 3 seconds) dark, patchily lit street, dark car; a light coloured car swings from left around corner, sweeps round, broadsides them (shot lasts 1 second) 41 sound music; bell tolls tapping sudden creak clang, squeaking as gates open music continues – spooky, not dramatic music; crackle of paper; clanking creaking of un-oiled hinges (a clue) car engine, squeal of tires P: Get in. Hurry. music + car engine P: They're following us. car engine, tires screech of tires N: Who's following us? P: The drop's been compromised. sound of bullet P: Get down! P: Stay down! crash as cars hit BCU, canted angle POV POV BCU PAN to POV BCU POV , canted angle, hand held TWO SHOT CU POV BCU – blurred his POV; slow PAN CU EST CU blurred outline EST, deep focus PULL BACK as REVERSE TRACKING canted angle ZOOM in BCU BCU BCU CU BCU CU - jerky BCU CU, PAN along arm INSERT CU BCU CU EST, TILT down to MS FAST PAN –to BCU mini- helicopter-cam shot CU LS BCU POV Parcher car drives through shot car beside them, passing tires, splashing water upwards car following again Nash, terrified, mouth open car following; headlights lighting a strip against the blue-black Parcher, Nash beyond him – blurred car beside them Nash's eyes dark car, street till light seen through the broken window Parcher driving brick wall of building, barred windows; shadow of car crosses, followed by headlights and car; shadow of second car followed by car Nash in back seat, frightened, face emerges in light series of archways (cf. Princeton cloisters, sc. 6) car swings into shot from left, drives to wards us, swings to one side to show pursuing car both cars, archway behind bullet hole in glass dashboard – splintered by bullet Nash Parcher hands gun back to Nash Nash Parcher Nash Parcher turns, arm outstretched, shoots through window; burst of light half-lit, blurry Nash, looks out window; lit up in one flash of light gun, light glinting on barrel, cartridge case flies Nash, blurred, terrified archway hole in window; gun barrel; explosion of light whole car, two hatted figures inside, bullet hole sin windscreen Parcher - blurred archways Parcher, shoots car, swings away to show following car emerges from arches Nash, backlit, crouching following car 42 horns tires screech gunfire P: Take this. N: I'm not shooting anybody. P: Take the goddam gun. N: No! gunshot screams CU his POV CU TWO SHOT, PAN CU CU MCU CU CU CU blurred CU – blurred MCU EST WIDE POV BCU CU BCU WIDE WIDE – POV from car BCU his POV WIDE MS, TACKING CU, TRACK EST Parcher, lit then heavily in shadow; looks in rearview mirror following car Nash to darkness - men in other car Nash, terrified, head in hands Parcher Parcher leans across Nash, shoots; burst of light x2 Nash's face behind Parcher's arm, gun; burst of light; and again Parcher, swings gun towards front; burst of light men in other car, both hit Nash other car – men collapse waterfront area – warehouses, sea beyond, glinting lights through windscreen as car approaches water Parcher's foot from accelerator to brake Parcher tires two cars, side by side, coming towards, past us; one stops harbour, light on water; other car continues into the sea, big splash Nash in car car hitting water, floating Parcher's car, he gets out he runs to edge of wharf Nash opens door, gets out Nash's home – warm, comforting, secure P: You stay back. Don't move. screams tires screech screech splash music builds slam of door The famous fly puzzle that Nash talks about in scene 62 Two cyclists start 20 miles apart and head toward each other, each going at a steady rate of 10 m.p.h. At the same time, a fly that travels at a steady 15 m.p.h. starts from the front wheel of the southbound bicycle and flies to the front wheel of the northbound one, then turns around and flies to the front wheel of the southbound one again, and continues in this manner till it is crushed between the two front wheels. Question: what total distance did the fly cover? There are two ways to answer the problem. One is to calculate the distance the fly covers on each leg of its trips between the two bicycles and finally sum the infinite series so obtained. The quick way is to observe that the bicycles meet exactly an hour after they start so that the fly had just an hour for its travels; the answer must therefore be 15 miles. The professor on whom Helinger is presumably based, von Neumann, was asked to solve the problem, which he did in an instant, and so disappointed the questioner, who commented that he must “know the trick”. "What trick?" asked von Neumann, "All I did was sum the infinite series." In his head. 43 Links Between the Opening and Closing Scenes sc. 1 sc. John Nash, co-winner of the Carnegie Medal, is in his introductory lecture. 65 John Nash is in an auditorium receiving the Nobel Prize. 1 Helinger makes a speech. 65 Nash makes a speech. 1 Mathematics is important. 65 Love is more important. 2 Hansen is the golden boy. 65 Hansen is in the audience. 2 Nash is gauche, abrupt, direct, intellectual. 65 Nash is humble, grateful, more polished. 3 Charles Herman introduces himself as Nash's roommate. 65 Charles is there - unchanged. 4 Nash is ambitious to make his mark; he wants to discover an original idea. 65 He is finally being rewarded for his original idea. 5 Nash is not attending classes. 59 Nash attends his first class. 5 Hansen challenges him to Go: H: Scared? N: Terrified. Mortified. Petrified. Stupefied by you. 63 repeated – but the mood has changed 5 Hansen: The great John Nash! 57 Parcher: The great John Nash! 6 Nash does maths on the library window 61 Nash does maths on the same library window 6 In the library Charles: When did you last eat? 61 In the library Nash: When did you last eat? 7 A girl is interested in Nash but his gaucheness gets him a slapped face. 65 Nash thanks Alicia for her love and support. 9 Nash witnesses a celebratory ritual of pen giving – for the achievement of a lifetime. 64 Nash is the recipient of the pen ritual. 10 Nash: I can't fail. This is all I am. 65 Nash, to Alicia: You are all my reasons. 13 Professor Helinger recognises Nash's breakthrough 65 Nash's breakthrough is rewarded. There is a deliberate repetition of earlier scenes and motifs to emphasise the journey Nash has made – "through the physical, the metaphysical, the delusional and back." 44 Characterisation – some thoughts John Nash / Russell Crowe "a man forever voyaging through strange seas of Thought, alone." (Wordsworth) Crowe creates his character partly through the way he holds his head and his hands, through his gestures, through his face, especially the eyes. He wears false teeth to give him an overbite. The mannerism – fingers to his brow – and his rather stiff gait are both symptoms of the illness. They can be seen in the earlier scenes as eccentricities but later become more pronounced as affects (medical term) of the disease. Other symptoms: unshaven, scruffy, hair uncombed, wears pyjamas, nervous. Changes in Nash/Crowe to indicate vulnerability longer hair, softer cut, more untidy, uncontrolled; clothes even worse than before arrogance, assurance gone: "Seems you won after all." / "They were wrong. No one wins." Back at Princeton: stiff, awkward gait, twitchy, mouth working as he talks to himself; rides bike in figure 8; time: hair grey, thinner, receding; glasses; + changing styles Howard: It was on paper a great screen performance but kind of a scary character to take on, so I needed somebody with real courage. John Nash is a very complex character. In interpreting that character, you needed an actor with the ability, with the presence and charisma to command your interest over a period of time and the talent to pull that off. And also the nerve. Brian Grazer, producer: The reason I wanted Russell more than anybody was that he is able to communicate with you without words. He's able to get you interested in him through his charisma and his intelligence that you read out of his eyes. Howard: When I met with him, I wasn't 100% convinced going into the meeting, but I was very interested in discussing it with him, and I found that his questions were important. The intelligence that he displayed asking these questions was very exciting for me. I knew he was charismatic, and I knew he was talented, but I saw a level of intelligence that whoever played Nash had to be able to display. You can't really act it, fake it; it's not a matter of just saying the words. That spark has to be there, and I saw it there in spades. Grazer: Russell understands cinematic impact, so he has enough understanding and confidence that he's able to convey ideas – in this case, get you inside someone's feelings and someone's mind. Howard: Russell's very intense, very intense, but I don't get the feeling it's a show. It's really about the vibe he feels he needs to try to create something, or sometimes the vibe he thinks the entire set needs to get in the right space, to maximise the scene. Russell is a very charismatic guy but a character actor at heart. He wants to discover a character, define it within his own terms, ingest it and present it back to you in a way that's insightful and entertaining. This is kinda his genius. The critics could not agree Crowe is indeed impressive as the brilliant mathematician, John Forbes Nash . . . [Observer] Fundamentally, Crowe's performance is a silly, dumbed-down version of his tobacco scientist in Michael Mann's The Insider. There he was a prickly, intelligent human being. His Nash is just a cutely shambling, lovable problem-filled bear of a man. [Guardian] Crowe brings the character to life by sidestepping sensationalism and building with small behavioural details. Crowe, who has an uncanny ability to modify his look to fit a role, always seems convincing as a man who ages 47 years during the film. [Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times] Crowe's tics and mannerisms add up to nothing more than an acting class exercise. There's nothing organic about the character. Even when he's lying around the house in a ratty shirt and pants, unsure of what to do with himself, he looks like he's been dolled up by the wardrobe department. Neither Howard nor Crowe seem to have any idea how a person like this really lives. It's all façade. [SF Examiner] It's a tortured-genius movie, and Crowe lives down to the conception with a performance that is possibly the biggest load of hooey to stink up the screen this year. [Taylor, Salon.com] 45 Russell Crowe thoroughly convincing as a genius with schizophrenia . . . magnificently performed by Crowe, who never fails to surprise, and Connelly, as the wife who always forgave, always encouraged and ultimately brought her husband back to life. Inspiring and largely unsentimental, this is as much a love story as a tale of courage. [SF Chronicle] But above all there is the fierce presence of Mr Crowe, who refuses every temptation to overact the role set before him. Too often the chance to depict genius or mental disorder is taken, even by gifted actors like Dustin Hoffman (Rain Man) and Geoffrey Rush (Shine), as a licence to show off. Mr Crowe, with his superhuman powers of concentration, shows us a man who dwells almost entirely in an inner world, and he dramatises that inwardness as if nobody were watching. A faint smile plays across Nash's mouth, and his speech is whispery and halting, with a suggestion of the South in its cadences. (Mr Nash grew up in West Virginia.) As always with Mr Crowe, you never feel that these are actorly mannerisms; they seem instead to arise from a deep absorption in the logic of the character. [NY Times] - Alicia Larde / Jennifer Connelly introduced from Nash's POV – in lecture room, and then in his office lecture room: openly challenging but totally 'feminine' bright enough to be one of a few women students in a mostly 'masculine' subject in the late 40s. in his office, she is girlish, openly flirtatious, coquettish transformed from a maths groupie into a remarkably heroic figure: strong, courageous, resilient, supportive, however, little effort is made to explore her feelings, attitudes, motivation: though she in effect rescues and saves Nash, his story takes centre stage and she has little screen time They all agree on Jennifer Connelly, though Fortunately, Jennifer Connelly presents herself as a serious contender for an Oscar. One of the screen's most stunningly beautiful actresses . . . Here she gets the uninteresting and secondary "wife" role, but dazzles us in a few good scenes. . . . marvellous, subtle performance . . . [SF Examiner] Grazer: We read hundreds of actresses, some stars, some models, unknowns. . . Howard: I was absolutely sure with Jennifer. I had a strong hunch from just meeting her. . . Alicia was inordinately beautiful and unusually ambitious academically when she met Nash. . . She looks a little bit like young Alicia Nash, which wasn't crucial. . . I really knew when I saw Jennifer and Russell auditioning together. Russell already had the part. . . Their scenes together just clicked. Grazer: . . . you get a sense immediately, "Is there a chemistry?" And the chemistry is something you identify on a lot of different levels. [Someone like Crowe needs an actress who will challenge him if he is to perform at he top of his game.] Howard: There was a strength that Jennifer demonstrated with total humanity. There were no walls. You just felt there was going to be tremendous interaction and chemistry between the two of them as actors. - The Delusional Characters Charles – always in a white shirt, supportive, with answers; unconditional friendship – the 'perfect friend' Marcee: always neat, clean, tidy, loving – the 'perfect' child, without tantrums, dirt or bad behaviour Parcher: wears hat inside, blue eyes, controlled and unflinching – the 'perfect spy' 46 Genre A film like this, that includes the ingredients and styles of four different genres, is an excellent way to introduce the concept. What do we understand by the term 'genre'? A particular genre includes certain basic ingredients, the way a chocolate cake or a casserole does. Showing a bit of That's Entertainment will quickly illustrate the concept. Spoofs are a good way to help identify the conventions of a particular genre. How many genres can students identify? [NB Hollywood clones do not a genre make.] Horror, Musical, Rock, Road Movie, War, Romance, Thriller, Gangster, Adventure, Comedy, Screwball Comedy, Epic, Caper Movie, Disaster, Kung Fu or Martial Arts . . . Select a few of the easier genres and ask students to list typical/expected features. This can be a useful group exercise, with each group having a different genre to look at. Western men against the landscape main street, small town shoot out goodies v baddies simple honest cowboy v. tricky lawyers/ bandits/ rustlers / etc freedom; journeys honour and integrity v. compromise saloons with a brassy landlady whore with a heart of gold Science Fiction Much more variety, less adherence to formula: space, time travel, genetic modification etc high-tech weapons - laser guns etc special effects heroism epic scale: in action and setting good v evil The Use of Genre Features in A Beautiful Mind Clarify the four different genre styles (see p. 12) Group work: allocate one of the four styles to each group, which makes a collage or poster illustrating the features of that particular genre Research: investigate other films within one or more of the four genre styles. Film Noir Strictly speaking, film noir is not a genre. It is the term originally given to a body of films – moody, downbeat melodramas - that emerged from Hollywood between the late 30s and the late 50s with shared stylistic and thematic concerns. The term was first used by French critics, because of the 'blackness' of the look and themes. Unlike the usual glossy, high colour, brightly lit, upbeat Hollywood product, these films were bleak social documents that turned a disenchanted eye upon the contemporary American scene and uncovered a society full of anxieties and divisions. A frequent theme was a male protagonist lured into crime by a femme fatale who then double crosses him. Because many of them were 'B' pictures, they were less likely to come under the close scrutiny of studio bosses and the censorship office, and so more risky themes often sneaked through. However, the term came to be used much more widely for the urban crime thriller, that is like a conventional thriller in plot and character, but that uses the moody lighting and camera work of the noir style. Examples of noir thrillers: The Third Man (still the best), The Postman Always Rings Twice, Double Indemnity; D.O.A., The Maltese Falcon, Notorious, Key Largo, and more recently, Chinatown, The Grifters, The Last Seduction. 47 The Coen Brothers reinvented film noir with their 1984 Blood Simple, and ushered in an era of 'post-modern' thrillers with convoluted plots, black humour and sudden violence: Miller's Crossing, Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, The Usual Suspects, Fargo and so on. Biopic A picture based on a biography. For fairly obvious reasons, entertainers have tend to be favoured subjects for biopics over the years, often with great success: Funny Girl, Gypsy, Gable and Lombard, Great Balls of Fire. Scientists, on the other hand, are not usually seen as interesting or sexy or entertaining enough. Hollywood has a proud tradition of completely ignoring the facts in films based on real lives, especially in those made in the 40s and 50s, where certain subjects could not be mentioned. Cary Grant, elegant and heterosexual, was totally miscast (and obviously uncomfortable) as the gay Cole Porter in Night and Day, a biopic that managed to ignore Porter's sexuality completely. Nothing much has changed. A couple of recent films based on history - Elizabeth and Braveheart – are both much more fictional than factual. On the whole, great lives have not been turned into great films – and that includes Gandhi. And even if the film is good, it is unlikely to do well at the box office, and in Hollywood-speak, that means no more biopics for a while, as is shown by Nixon or Malcolm X. Both are interesting films, with fine acting performances, but neither was financially successful. The Hurricane did slightly better in 2000, but was criticised for its inaccuracies. Interestingly, for a genre generally considered box office poison, biopics did quite well in 2001-2. As well as A Beautiful Mind, Ali had its measure of success, if not in the box office, at least in the recognition of the fine acting job Will Smith did. There are a few basic templates for a Hollywood biopic. 1. The "triumph of the human spirit" model, in which misery and madness are overcome and happiness is found: Shine, A Beautiful Mind 2. The self-destructive model – drink, drugs or divorce bring down the innocent in the cut-throat world of movies or music (jazz, rock'n'roll or country will do): The Lady Sings the Blues 3. The promising life cut off tragically early: La Bamba 4. Or simply the inevitable 'Road to Dusty Death', albeit with triumph or fun on the way: Marie Antoinette; Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid 'films à clef' Films that appear to be fiction but are really based on factual cases with the names changed. Citizen Kane is probably the most famous example. Others include The Rose (Janis Joplin), Compulsion (Lerner and Loeb), The Great Dictator (Hitler), The Last Tycoon (Howard Hughes). And there is the hilarious case of Mussolini banning the Marx Brothers' brilliant Duck Soup in 1933 because he thought Groucho's Rufus T. Firefly resembled him too much. There are two main problems with biopics. The first is the total impossibility of recreating a human life in two or three hours of screen time. It is barely possible in a 450-page book (which is what Sylvia Nasar devoted to Nash.) The second is the reluctance of living relatives – and sometimes living subjects – to have the truth of their lives exposed to the world. What is more likely to result is a film like the 1968 Hank Williams biopic Your Cheating Heart, a widow-approved travesty which starred super-tanned George Hamilton, and in which Williams is sanitised to death. 48 True or False? Some Thoughts How does the film depict Nash's recovery? It suggests it was a conscious decision he made – so that he could work and function again. His return to Princeton is a result of a similar decision, and he seems able to function reasonably well. The biography, on the other hand, describes Nash as basically living for two decades in a fog: "a peculiar thin silent man walking the halls night and day … with sunken eyes and a sad immobile face" (Nasar, p.332) In other words, it was much harder than the film suggests. Each of the following incidents or behaviours was altered or invented for the film. For each, explain how it was changed for the film, and suggest reasons for each change. Are the changes justifiable? Nash went to Princeton in 1948. 1947. Why? No idea. He did not win a "Carnegie Scholarship"; he held the John S. Kennedy Fellowship, the most prestigious on offer. Nash went to the Carnegie Institute of Technology for his undergraduate studies – no doubt this is where the scholarship name came from. Presumably John S Kennedy sounds too close to John F Kennedy and might confuse an audience. He did not share his Fellowship; the shared scholarship is introduced to emphasise the competitive nature of the environment. Nash already had his thesis idea before arriving at Princeton; he published another paper before he wrote it. Nash cannot come up with his original idea. To inject urgency and drama into the film. There was no pressure to write a dissertation. As above. The importance of Nash's Equilibrium was not recognised at the time. The film needed an incident of importance to spin the story to the next level. It also allows Nash a great success before his descent into delusion. Hansen, Sol, Bender, Professor Helinger are all fictional characters. Characters who could be carried through the film were needed, and apart from Alicia, there was no one in real life. Hansen provides an early rival and later support. Helinger is presumably based on the real Professor von Neumann. After Princeton, he took a teaching post at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology). Teaching is less glamorous than research; the latter allows him to move in semi-military circles. There was no indication of mental problems before 1959, when he turned 30. The film postulates that Nash was schizophrenic from late adolescence, which is when it is usually diagnosed in males, and that it did not manifest itself to outsiders until he was 30. This is because the film is about schizophrenia, rather than just Nash. For the same reason, Nash says in the scene with Thomas King that he takes the newer medication; the real Nash did not take medication. Nash's schizophrenia took the form of delusions: multiple identities in his mind, ideas of both his power and of his vulnerability (e.g. he thought he was the Emperor of Antarctica, and at other times, an Arab refugee); he wrote often incoherent letters to ambassadors etc. The film replaces the extraterrestrials with Russian spies, the multiple identities with delusional companions; the letters with his code-breaking activities. Extraterrestrials would be so unbelievable that the film's central conceit of having us share Nash's delusional life, and having us believe it is true, would not work at all. We would know extraterrestrials were not real. The tearing up of magazines etc is more visual than writing letters – and allows cool SFX. Generally, the approach of the film is to have schizophrenic delusions visual and comprehensible. Nash was committed several times to mental institutions. Once is enough in a two hour film – the point is made, and repetition would be boring (though it could be done in montage.) Members of the mathematics community supported him emotionally and financially for many years. There is no suggestion of this at all, apart from Hansen's moral support at Princeton. It would require too many scenes, too many characters etc. The film's focus is on Alicia's support. 49 The following aspects of Nash's life were all left out of the film. Suggest a reason for each omission. Are the omissions justifiable? Nash had a mistress, Eleanor Stier, for five years and an illegitimate son, John Stier, whom he acknowledged but did not financially support until Eleanor got a court order. The focus is on his relationship with Alicia; this would undermine the generally positive portrayal of Nash – his treatment of his son and of Eleanor was not admirable behaviour – which the film-makers obviously did not wish to do. And would be too complicating to handle in the time frame. He had several close, apparently sexual, relationships with men. As above. Alicia divorced Nash in 1964, though she took him back into her home in 1970; they remarried in 1994. The film-makers justify this omission on the grounds that John and Alicia are still together, and have remarried. In many ways, Alicia's taking him back makes her an even more heroic figure than the loving one shown in the film. She divorced him because the ties of marriage seemed to make him worse – he blamed her for his commitment to hospital, though both his mother and sister were involved in the decisions – and Alicia hoped that freeing him from the marriage might help him recover. She took him back in 1970 when his mother died because his sister could not (she had a young family) and Alicia knew that no one else would. Without her, he would probably have had to be institutionalised. Nash lived with his mother in Roanoke from 1967-70. Make the film too long. In the film, Nash has no family – Parcher comments on this. Nash was part of the RAND (Research and Development) Corporation, an air force think tank, for 4 years (1950-4). Goldsman says he merged this with MIT / Wheeler. Nash was arrested for 'indecent exposure' and lost his security clearance in 1954. Presumably seen as too complicating, though it does sanitise Nash's story. But to cover it properly would have taken a great deal of screen time. After his first hospitalisation, he disappeared for many months. He visited Europe several times. Take too much time, be too complicated. He became very skilled with computers in later years. Not very cinematic. Thirty years of Nash's life are covered in a couple of montage sequences. He was renowned for his practical jokes, and for his nastiness, his arrogance and his intolerance. This is a typical Ron Howard movie; everyone is nice. Presumably these aspects of Nash's character would be seen to alienate audience sympathy, and since the stated aim of the film makers was to present schizophrenia in such a way as to make it understandable to an audience, to make the general public more aware, more sympathetic to sufferers, they apparently felt they needed to make Nash a more likable person than he was in reality. They repeatedly comment that this is not Nash's story so much as based on his life, his experience; the film is more concerned to attempt to replicate the experience of suffering from schizophrenia rather than give an honest account of one sufferer's life. The critics complain that this is dishonest – but is it any more so than any of the other alterations to Nash's life? Is it underestimating the public? If anything, a less attractive Nash makes Alicia even more heroic. The real John Nash in his Nobel Prize photo 50 Character and Quotation Test Beside the description of the character, write the correct name from the list below. 1. professor of mathematics at Princeton 2. an imaginary little girl 3. a talented student who marries Nash 4. a former colleague who visits Nash at home 5. a psychiatrist 6. brings news of the Nobel Prize win 7. works with Nash at Wheeler 8. a secret agent 9. an English student 10. co-winner of the Carnegie Scholarship William Parcher, Alicia Larde, Charles Herman, Richard Sol, Helinger, Martin Hansen, Bender, Rosen, Marcee, Thomas King For each of the following quotations, state who says it and explain the context and/or significance. Use your own paper for this; you may need several lines for some answers. Don't write out the quotation; just put the number in the margin. [2 marks each.] 1. I like to think it's because I'm a lone wolf but mainly it's because people don't like me. 2. Imagine if you had suddenly learned that the people and the places and the moments most important to you were not gone, not dead, but worse, had never been. What kind of hell would that be? 3. I read your pre-prints. Both of 'em. And I'm convinced there wasn't one seminal or innovative idea in either one of them... 4. She never gets old. Marcee can't be real. She never gets old. 5. The prodigal roommate revealed. 6. Find a truly original idea. It is the only way I will ever distinguish myself. It is the only way I will ever matter. 7. I'm sorry; just give me a moment to redefine my girlish notions of romance. 8. Classes will dull your mind. They will destroy the potential for authentic creativity. 9. I need to believe that something extraordinary is possible. 10. Adam Smith needs revision. . . . Adam Smith – was wrong. 11. On occasion, yeah. Table for one. Prometheus alone, chained to the rock with a bird circling overhead, you know how it is. 12. I still see things that are not here. I just choose not to acknowledge them. 13. What distinguishes you is that you are, quite simply, the best code-breaker I have ever seen. 14. A pair of odd ducks then. 15. Nothing's ever "for sure" - that's the only sure thing I do know. [Total marks: 40] 51 Test answers 1. professor of mathematics at Princeton Helinger 2. an imaginary little girl Marcee 3. a talented student who marries Nash Alicia Larde 4. a former colleague who visits Nash at home Richard Sol 5. a psychiatrist Rosen 6. brings news of the Nobel Prize win Thomas King 7. works with Nash at Wheeler Bender 8. a secret agent William Parcher 9. an English student Charles Herman 10. co-winner of the Carnegie Scholarship Martin Hansen Quotations 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Nash to Parcher during their first meeting; the inability to get on with people is a typical characteristic of schizophrenia. Dr Rosen to Alicia, explaining Nash's illness. Nash to Hansen at their first meeting; helps establish the competitiveness between them, and Nash's insistence on originality. Nash to Alicia; his realisation that the delusions are delusions. His turning point. Nash to Charles in Rosen's room, when he thinks he has been betrayed to Rosen by Charles. Nash to Charles in the early scene on the roof; Nash's driving need to succeed, to achieve. And his insistence on originality. Alicia to Nash after he has 'proposed' in a most unromantic way. Nash to Sol, Bender etc when they mention that he has not been going to classes. And his insistence on originality. Alicia to Nash after he has asked for time to control his disease without drugs. Nash to Hansen, Sol etc when he gets the idea for his bargaining theory. Nash to Alicia, when she asks his out to dinner and says, "You do eat, don't you?" Shows his solitariness but also his wit and cleverness. Nash to Thomas King, explaining how he controls his disease. Parcher to Nash when he is recruiting him. Parcher witnessed the code breaking at the Pentagon. In reality, it is Nash providing for himself the sort of confirmation of his talent that he craves. Nash to Alicia when she says she once tried to count the stars. Suggests she is an unusual woman, and one whom Nash could see as an equal. Charles to Nash when the latter asks for reassurance that he is right to marry Alicia. 52 Schizophrenia The origins of schizophrenia are mysterious. The condition was first described in 1806, but no one is certain whether the illness - or, more likely, group of illnesses - existed long before then but had escaped definition or, on the other hand, appeared as an AIDS-like scourge at the start of the industrial age. Roughly one percent of the population in all countries succumbs to it. Why it strikes one individual and not another is not known. . . Eugen Bleuler, who coined the term schizophrenia in 1908, describes a "specific type of alteration of thinking, feeling and relation to the external world. The term refers to a splitting of psychic functions, "a peculiar destruction of the inner cohesiveness of the psychic personality." To the person experiencing early symptoms, there is a dislocation of every faculty, of time, space, and body. None of its symptoms - hearing voices, bizarre delusions, extreme apathy or agitation, coldness toward others - is, taken singly, unique to the illness. And symptoms vary so much between individuals and over time for the same individual that the notion of a "typical case" is virtually nonexistent. Even the degree of disability - far more severe, on average, for men - varies wildly. The symptoms can be slightly, moderately, severely, or absolutely disabling. . . Though Nash succumbed at age 30, the illness can appear at any time from adolescence to advanced middle age. The first episode can last a few weeks or months or several years. The life history of someone with the disease can include only one or two episodes. . . . More often, as happened in Nash's case, people with the disease suffer many, progressively more severe episodes that occur at ever shorter intervals. Recovery, almost never complete, runs the gamut from a level tolerable to society to one that may not require permanent hospitalisation but in fact does not allow even the semblance of a normal life. [Nasar, p.17-8] Insulin Shock Therapy Treating schizophrenic patients with insulin coma was the idea of Manfred Sackel, a Viennese physician who thought of it during the 1920s and used it on psychotic patients, especially ones with schizophrenia, in the mid1950s. His notion was that if the brain were deprived of sugar, which is what keeps it going, the cells that were functioning marginally would die. It would be like radiation treatments for cancer. Some practitioners who used it in the 1950s, when the first effective antipsychotic drugs became available, took the view that insulin shock was more effective than anti-psychotics, especially with regard to delusional thinking. No one understood the mechanism, but two large-scale studies in the late 1930s found that insulin-treated patients had better and more lasting outcomes than untreated individuals, but evidence for insulin's efficacy was hardly overwhelming. It was any case riskier and far more involved than electroshock, and by 1960, insulin shock therapy had been phased out by most hospitals as too dangerous and expensive when compared with electroshock. The conclusion was that insulin wasn't worth the investment of time and money or the risks. . . While Nash later blamed the treatments for large gaps in his memory, he also told his cousin Richard Nash, whom he visited in San Francisco in 1967, that "I didn't get better until the money ran out and I went to a public hospital." [p. 293] For . . . six weeks, five days a week, Nash endured the insulin treatments. Very early in the morning, a nurse would wake him and give him an insulin injection. By . . . 8.30, Nash's blood sugar would already have dropped precipitously. He would have been drowsy, hardly aware of his surroundings, perhaps half-delirious and talking to himself. One woman used to yell, "Jump in the lake. Jump in the lake," By 9.30 or 10, Nash would be comatose, sinking deeper and deeper into unconsciousness until, at one stage, his body would become as rigid as if it were frozen solid and his fingers would be curled. At that point, a nurse would put a rubber hose through his nose and oesophagus and a glucose solution would be administered. Sometimes, if necessary, this would be done intravenously. Then he would wake up, slowly and agonizingly, with nurses hovering over him. By 11 in the morning, Nash would be conscious again. And by the late afternoon, when the whole group would walk over to occupational therapy, he would be among them, the nurses bringing along orange juice in case anyone felt faint. Very often, during the comatose stage, patients whose blood-sugar levels dropped too far would have spontaneous seizures - thrashing around, biting their tongues. Broken bones were not uncommon. Sometimes patients remained in a coma. Good, firsthand accounts of the experience are difficult to find, in part because the treatment destroys large blocs of recent memory. Nash would later describe insulin therapy as "torture," and he resented it for many years afterwards. . . [p. 292] 53 Interesting Facts Salma Hayek was considered for the part of Alicia Larde because Alicia is from El Salvador. Anthony Rapp and Adam Goldberg, who play Nash's assistants Sol and Bender, are usually seen in the film together. The two actors also played rarely separated best friends Tony and Mike in Richard Linklater's Dazed and Confused (1993). Ron Howard's wife appears as an extra, as does his daughter, in the scenes at Harvard. His son's voice can be heard in the celebration scene in the bar. His father is in a hospital scene not used in the film. One of John Nash's sons plays the orderly on the right in the scene where Nash is being dragged down the hall. John Nash visited the set, and Russell Crowe said later that he had been fascinated by the way Nash moved his hands, and he had tried to do the same thing in the movie. The scene towards the end of the film where Nash contemplates drinking tea is based on a true event when Russell Crowe met the real John Nash. He spent 15 minutes discussing the kinds of tea available. Nash's line in the scene with Thomas King – "Suddenly everyone likes that one" - is quoted from Billy Wilder's comment to Ron Howard about the current respect for his previously overlooked Sunset Boulevard. The Pentagon office scene was filmed in the basement of Keating Hall on Fordham University's Bronx campus, the same room used in the filming of the Georgetown University language lab scene in The Exorcist. The Nobel Prize ceremony was filmed in Prudential Hall at the New Jersey Performing Arts Centre (NJPAC) in Newark, NJ. The filming for that one scene, including set up, make up, etc, took over 8 hours. However, the scene in the lobby afterwards was filmed at another location. The Harvard scene is actually filmed at Manhattan College. Allusions In the scene on the veranda with Richard Sol, Nash makes a joke about an imaginary person called Harvey. This is an allusion to the film Harvey (1950), in which James Stewart plays a drunk whose companion is a 6 foot tall rabbit called Harvey. When Nash first sees Parcher, he refers to him as "Big Brother", an allusion to George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. Later, we see that the room number of Nash's office is 101, another allusion to the book. The board game "Go" is also featured in the movie Pi (1998), which shares the theme of a mathematician with mental health problems who believes that the universe can be explained through the use of mathematics, numbers, and patterns. Requiem for a Dream (2000), which co-starred Jennifer Connelly, was directed by Darren Arronofsky who also directed Pi. Nash believed that Go was flawed and invented his own version – called Nash or John – that was very popular among mathematicians. It relied on logic and perfect playing to win; chance played no part. Although it was offered to a board game publisher, it was not accepted; a similar game invented by a Dane was later marketed as Hex. Scenes covering this were filmed but did not make the final cut. A love scene with Crowe and Connelly was shot but not included in the film since it impeded the narrative flow. Jennifer Connelly married Paul Bettany after the film was finished; they are expecting their first child. The film was largely shot in sequence – which is unusual – but it does enable the actors to experience and recreate the emotional development of characters in the order it would have happened, which is what stage actors are able to do in each performance. 54 Cast, Crew, Locations Russell Crowe Ed Harris Jennifer Connelly Paul Bettany John Nash William Parcher Alicia Larde Nash Charles Herman Adam Goldberg Judd Hirsch Josh Lucas Sol Helinger Hansen Anthony Rapp Christopher Plummer Vivien Cardone Jason Gray-Stanford Austin Pendleton Victor Steinbach Tanya Clarke Thomas F. Walsh Jesse Doran Kent Cassella Patrick Blindauer John Blaylock Roy Thinnes Anthony Easton Cheryl Howard Ainsley Thomas King Professor Homer Becky captain general analyst MIT student photographer governor young man Harvard administrator Ranee Howard J.J. Chaback Darius Stone Josh Pais Alex Toma Valentina Cardinalli Teagle F. Bougere Jill M. Simon David B. Allen Michael Esper Catharina Eva Burkley Amy Walz Director Producers Screenplay Bender Doctor Rosen Marcee white-haired patient code-red nurse adjunct Princeton professor Toby Joyce young professor bar co-ed John Nash Jr, aged 13 John Nash Jr, aged 20 girl at bar blonde in bar Director of Photography Editors Production Designer Music Ron Howard Brian Grazer, Ron Howard Akiva Goldsman based on the book A Beautiful Mind: A Biography of John Forbes Nash, by Sylvia Nasar Roger Deakins Mike Hill, Dan Hanley Wynn Thomas James Homer "All Love Can Be" "Columbia Aspexit" Psychology Consultant Mathematics Consultant Charlotte Church; Emma Kirkby, Gothic Voices Doctor Marianne Gillow Dave Bayer Filmed on location in: Bayonne, New Jersey, USA Belleville, New Jersey, USA East Orange, New Jersey, USA Fairleigh Dickinson University, Madison, New Jersey, USA Fordham University, Bronx, New York City, New York, USA Jersey City, New Jersey, USA Manhattan College, Riverdale, New York, USA New York City, New York, USA Newark, New Jersey, USA Princeton, New Jersey, USA Yonkers, New York, USA 55 YEAR 12 UNIT TITLE Film Study: A Beautiful Mind DURATION STRAND SUB-STRANDS 5 – 6 weeks Visual Language Viewing ACHIEVEMENT OBJECTIVES/ PROCESSES LEVELS Viewing 6-7 Exploring Language 6-7 Transactional Writing 6-7 Thinking Critically LINKS WITH OTHER STRANDS Interpersonal Speaking Transactional Writing LEARNING OUTCOMES By the end of this unit, students should be able to identify and analyse film language accurately analyse film image and sequences in detail analyse and discuss the use of narrative techniques use film terminology accurately and with confidence write an essay about an aspect of the text 6-7 ACTIVITIES METHODOLOGY (class work, group work, individual assignments) View film followed by general discussion & responses Revision of film terminology Study of plot & narrative structure Close Reading the film via task-sheets Detailed analysis of selected scenes Characterisation exercises. Truth or fiction? assignment activities research expository essay RESOURCES 1. video/DVD of film 2. glossary of film language 3. task sheets whole class individual assignments ASSESSMENT CRITERIA ASSESSMENT TASKS NCEA Level 2 National Curriculum criteria: reading visual language Formative: short answer test on film terms character and quotation test ? task-sheets essay exercise Summative: character and quotation test ? 56 essay
