独家优惠奖金 100% 高达 1 BTC + 180 免费旋转

The Technical Art form of Martin Scorsese

I think Scorsese is the filmmaker that has the most tricks up his sleeve.

I have a professor that told us to be conscious in two things in life: our Content and our Packaging.

Regardless of the things that we do in life, these two facets can be contextualized into many forms. But for me, I saw it as a perfect reflection in the world of film.

I see Content in film as the story. The raw hallmarks of the characters; the depth and life of the setting; the emotions being thrown on screen. While Packaging is how the film is being presented. Cinematography, sound, editing, the Mise en Scène, anything from the ground up that elevates our experience and tells us that we are really watching a Film.

To properly put it into definition, content and packaging can be in the same shoes of art and technicality, respectively.

At a glance, we would notice that art and technicality are on the opposite sides of the spectrum. But as it takes into form and the “movie magic” takes place, these two converges and a fine mixture is then produced; all of the sides are filled, and a balance between these two can considerably be the aspect that can make or break a film.

I believe that a film is a balance between story and technicality after all.

What’s amazing about a film is that, it is the living testament, that through experience, we can see that there is definitely beauty in technicality.

Martin Scorsese — an auteur of a modern generation.

A story-teller and a visionary. For me, he is one of the most influential directors that is still working to this day. By simply being that, I can undoubtedly say that he is a film-making icon.

His knowledge towards the craft is impeccable, wielding know-hows from the past, advancing to the modern forefronts of film. Lack of creativity has never been a problem to the Oscar-award winner.

What ever element it may be, his knowledge encompasses both sides; may it be in the aspect of Story or Technicality. He knows how a film works. For me though, there is something special about Scorsese that makes him different from his peers. Consider this: If you know how your story goes, then the way it would be presented should be regardless.

Scorsese articulates every technical element just to make it more experiential, in a sense. He is known for his ‘tricks’ or techniques in storytelling, but rather I see it as a free-form approach to the art in presenting a film.

By that, he makes the director’s presence known. Through a slight push-in or a closeup, the directorial choice of hand-held footage or an editing style; with the balance of a well-written script delivered by a top-tier performance.

Scorsese, in my opinion, has perfected the balance between story and technicality.

Let me show you some of his film making techniques that I have noticed in his filmography.

Scorsese is known for his excessive but effective use of voice-over. This is usually complemented by a track playing in the background and astounding visuals that go along to what the character is narrating about.

Scorsese’s stories can be considered more ‘Character-driven’ than ‘Plot-driven’. When he won the Oscar for The Departed, he commented that that was the only film he directed that had a plot. As many of his pictures are Biopics, V.O. helps the film be true to the story it is trying to portray.

Characters that voice-over a scene becomes the life and the drive of the storytelling tool itself. It is as if, the characters are telling the audience their story directly, making it a personal experience. Its a masterful technique that lets the film interact with its audience.

Here is an in-depth video essay about it by the Truthtellers!

There are directors that have a specific go-to camera set-up in every shot. Alejandro González Iñárritu (Revenant, Babel, Birdman) is known for his astonishing oneshot takes; David Fincher (The Social Network, Seven, Fight Club) is a camera-on-a-tripod kind of director; Wes Anderson (Fantastic Mr. Fox, Moonrise Kingdom, The Grand Budapest Hotel) places his camera static, perfecting the frame composition in making it symmetrical.

Talking about Scorsese, there is only two words that pops into my mind that perfectly captures his shots, the first one being: Aggressive. The fast paced tilts and pans, make-shifting the camera as the head of the audience, showing them what they need to see; The continuous long takes, used to get a conversation across; The snazzy push-ins that presents power and emphasis to a character.

The other word would have to be: Appropriate. What’s amazing about Scorsese is that he is not tied down to a certain style when it comes to his cinematographic decisions. He appropriates the camera movement to the scene, making the scene effective and more visually appealing.

Take this shot in Goodfellas as an example.

A great way to jumpstart a story of a gangster would be to make him look epic.

This push-in tells us a lot about the character of Henry Hill. It tells us that the story will delve about his dramatic journey into organized crime, and the camera isn't shy doing so. Appropriately aggressive.

Another from Goodfellas is this brilliant example of a long-take-tracking-steadycam shot that I always see in a Scorsese movie.

Closeups are shots used to emphasize a certain point in a scene. Scorsese usually uses them not only on character’s faces to show emotion, but also on props or set dressings that are relevant for the scene.

This lets the audience capture a more vivid sense, generating much importance to what the story intends to. Also, this cut to close up makes the story more pleasing in terms of aesthetic aspect. It lets us see more things about the story. More shots are more details. (As long as they’re relevant, of course.)

Imagine if Scorsese removes a certain closeup on a scene, it would feel totally different. It would feel boring and too static.

Of course, what wouldn't complete a set of filmmaking tools without the use of Slow motion? For me, I’m a big fan of slowmos. The most obvious reason for it is that we are able to savor the scene even more if the action plays out slowly. We are able to configure what emotions the character is telling us. Plus, it makes the character look more grandiose.

Beyond that, Scorsese had me in awe when he is able to exploit the element of frames in film even more.

Examine this scene for The Wolf Of Wall street.

Scorsese also considers shots if they are either dragging or rushing. (Shout outs to Whiplash!)

If the shot is dragging, speed ramping helps make the shot more bearable and the pace of the story is undisturbed. This is a way to ‘fix’ it in post. I am an avid fan of the slow motion and I have never had thought that it could be done the other way around.

If the shot is rushing, or either too fast for the audience to see, slow motion is a technique frequently used by Scorsese to emphasize and make aware that that certain thing is important and should be captured into perspective. Slowmotion is also used for the appreciation of fleeting moments in the story as it breaks the real time speed of whats happening on screen.

I credit Thelma Schoonmaker, Scorsese’s long-time Editor, for making these manipulations in frame speed. Of course as the editor of the film, she also has a big say to these creative decisions.

Here is another example; now combining both Slow motion and Speed Ramping. This garnered an Oscar award for Best Editing and I for one consider this as one of the best sequences in American cinema.

Scorsese, in my opinion, is a director that perfected his craft towards using this technique.

Together with the voice over as a way to interact to the audience, Scorsese breaks the 4th wall through dialogue with the camera to address on what’s happening in a scene as if we are having a direct conversation.

I remember in a video essay I watched about The Wolf of Wall Street; every time Leonardo Di Carpio’s character’s talks to the camera, you are hit with the realization that Leo is playing Jordan Belfort is playing Jordan Belfort in his own film. It sort of blows my mind a little because of the complexity on how Scorsese uses this technique.

I also like the idea that whenever someone is introduced in Scorsese’s film, they are usually in their own shot and they directly look at the camera and do what they do, meaning to seem that they are being introduced to the us in real life.

In a sense, they are breaking the 4th wall because of the unconventional and nonfictional presentation of their character in the film. Also, there is an interaction while Jordan Belfort introduces us to the Rugrat, as displayed in the last panel.

The breaking of the 4th wall tells us that the interaction between the characters in the story and the audience watching the film neither affects the
story being told.

Scorsese is smart to use this excessively in his films making us feel a rather unique movie experience delving much deeper in the life of the story.

There are just combinations of artists you can’t separate in film.

Christopher Nolan and Hans Zimmer; the Coen Brothers and Roger Deakins;

Martin Scorsese and Thelma Schoonmaker.

Schoonmaker is a frequent collaborator in Scorsese’s films.

She has achieved amazing feats in the field of editing — 7 Academy Award nominations to be exact; winning 3 of them (Raging Bull, The Aviator, and The Departed).

If a director has his specialty in a technical element, Scorsese would be distinct in the field of Editing. But he wouldn’t have done it without the help of Thelma, of course.

“Letting the audience see what they need to see.”

Many would prefer to ‘hide’ their Editing; cutting on action, cutting on so that continuity is maintained. This technique in Scorsese’s filmography is very different to the way other directors use this.

Let me take you to Manhattan in 1846. This may be the weirdest cut I have seen in a Scorsese film ever. Even so, I understood what’s happening and what Scorsese and Schoonmaker is trying to convey in the frame.

Above might be an extreme example, but here is a much subtle one. Now this example plays on the ‘uncontinuity’ of dialogue and visuals.

From Scorsese and Thelma, I've learned that continuity is not important at all. What’s important is that the audience is made aware of the information in a scene to understand whats happening in the story, regardless of the perfect consistency of the shots. This is because the scene progresses on due to the audience already being conscious of the time and space in the frame.

I have seen a video that discusses this thoroughly, and highly recommend you guys watch it!

Freeze Frames are like paintings being shown on film. Usually paired with voice over or dialogue in the background to justify the relevance of the pause from the scene.

It’s an uncommon technique in today’s standards; nevertheless, it can be used for many effects. It can be made funny, it can be made dramatic.

Scorsese is considered as an influential director in utilizing this technique.

Scorsese isn't afraid to make his film not just a collection of shots, instead he goes beyond that; pausing frames to exaggerate a moment; using a photo for more vivid visual cues; he is extending the storytelling tools to what is more appropriate.

If it blatantly cuts to it, disregarding time and space of the scene, we understand more where the story is coming from.

He is a director that innovates film. He innovates by not sticking true to the form, but adds to what is already there.

The reason for utilizing this technique is also to classify what is being shown in the frame: If it is part of the story or if it’s just context needed to be presented and referenced to.

In the parting moments of The Wolf Of Wall Street, a shift of perspective is being shown; The aspect ratio literally moves to make us realize the distinct difference of what people think of him as Jordan is being put to an aspect ratio from a TV show shifting to the sad resulting reality of his actions.

This naturally makes us reflect back to what he did from the start, and we finally judge the morality of his journey as the ‘worlds greatest sales trainer’.

This is a good example of how a reference and the film itself are actually two sides of the same coin.

This makes the film as a whole, a totally different storytelling tool from just a collection of shots. In contrary, a film is a collection of the story itself.

Here would be the best example of how Scorsese utilizes this technique. Instead of usual montage of just shots, he amazes us with this blend of story.

If collecting a stamp is the same as collecting filmmaking techniques, Martin Scorsese would be one of the biggest collectors out there.

Yes, it’s agreeable that many directors use these individual techniques to their films, but what’s special about Scorsese is that he has the ability to pack these techniques and make ready to use them effectively in the right place and in the right time.

His style is an inspiration to many as he continually innovated his film form; His stories will always leave a mark to the world of cinema as we know it, his balance between the Story and Technicality would be unmatched for the years to come.

All of the content used are for educational purposes only. The rights goes to the respective owners.

Add a comment

What is your view?

Send

Related posts:

Reflecting on leaving Government

Initial thoughts from first few weeks on the outside.

An Old Race With a New Face

The word route gets used by a lot of runners. The word gets used for a variety of different things, ranging from my morning routine to the 20-mile run I plan during marathon training and of course…

Why Hearables Should be Your Number One Choice for the Gym

Many people now take for granted that biometric wearables and hearables “just work”. Everyone knows you can get heart rate from a smart watch, fitness band or a hearable device, right? While this is…