Continuity and Dialogue- Ariel H.

     In regards to both continuity and dialogue, I would like to first talk about the video about the Coen brother's uses of shot and reverse shot. Although I did not watch this video first, it made me go back to so,e of the others one's in order to get a new view of them. I thought the way in which they look at film is very interesting. They include a psychological aspect as well as technical, and although many other writers and directors do this, they seem to really stick to it in a way that is beneficial. It's really interesting how just the type of camera lens or angle can change so much about a shot. As with the Coen's method of a wide shot with the lens closer, it can be a bit uncomfortable, but it also brings the watcher in as if they are in between the discussion, ie. in the middle of the action. This provides a feeling of direct contact with the characters that a behind-the-shoulder shot wouldn't have. I also really like the comparison the video had between a film directed by the Coens versus not directed by them because the difference between even just those few second scenes was astounding. It really goes to show how each shot in a movie or slim of any sort is a mixture of dialogue, frames, and timing, and how they all need to harmonize in order to have the desired effect. 

    The second video I really enjoyed was The Royal Tenenbaums Bridge Scene Analysis. Firstly, I have never seen the movie, and this video made me want to. Secondly, the thing that really intrigued me at first about this scene was the way the camera moved. I did not know what blocking was previously, so it was really cool to learn about that. Additionally, I thought it was an interesting change from the Coen's staple shot and reverse shot, as there weren't clear cuts back and forth. Although the conversation happening isn't an argument per se, the camera moving smoothly back and forth makes the watcher feel kind of like a third party to the conversation. Something else I really like about this scene is that often the camera was not on the character speaking, but it was on the character reacting., as the purpose of each other their words was to insult or belittle the other. 

    Lastly, I really enjoyed the Mulholland Drive- Diner Scene video. I thought it was interesting that the camera angles switched between different formats within one scene. There were initially a lot of behind-the-shoulder shots and reverse shots, making the watcher kind of feel like a fly on the wall as one of the Coens said. However, as we get deeper into the conversation, it get's eerier. As the man delves into his dream, through body language we can see when he almost slips into his own consciousness, and when the discussion gets deeper, the camera angle changes so we are now seeing a more direct shot on his face. This direct view has a more direct impact as we're now right in between them as if part of the conversation. The slow zoom also makes it more intense and darkens the overall vibe although it's still light outside. After the man is done talking about his dream we go back to partially blocked shots, which makes the scene lighter once again. However, then the switch is between further away shots and first-person shots. We are now seeing through the eyes of the man once speaking, and the camera is less stable than before. The lack of stability mixed with the distress we see from the third-person is suspenseful as the scene is taken outside the diner. As we get closer to the previously mentioned wall, it's as if we know what's going to happen, and so does the man we are seeing it through. Even then, the jump scare still get's him, and to be honest, it did get me too. The fact that the scare had such an impact even though we are aware of its presence is due to the build-up of the slowness of the camera mixed with its angles and the dialogue. 

All of these videos really show how much of an impact framing has on the vibe and impact of a scene.