Every
movie contains certain aspects that give it a distinct quality, a distinct
feeling, and a distinct picture. You can sometimes see this change through
different visual effects or you can hear it by a new, creative sound to back
the movie. The sets and props under go a large improvement in their visual and
conceptual design from the 1913 film to the 1963 film.
Sets and props were very limited in
their design in the early films because of the large inexperience that the crew
had. Crewmembers had either never worked on a set design for an epic or had
very little background experience due to the fairly new invention of movies.
Since the movies were set to such a grand scale, it took time and practice to
develop the creative ideas and intellectual designs that were needed to
construct an elaborate and accurate portrayal of scenes for the time period. Crews
on the first Cabiria film were not able to produce the same magnitude of sets,
as crews were able to produce for Cleopatra’s entrance into Rome on her massive
parade, such as her own personal Sphynx float.
The increased amount of budget size
the films were able to have as the films grew to need a larger production size
allowed sets to be built bigger and better. Improved technology, more talented
and experienced designers, and better tools gave these epics backgrounds that
were able to accentuate the film. The sea battle of the 1963 Ben Hur was able
to be grander than the 1927 version because of the improved scale and design on
the boats instead of small models that were used originally.
As the time period went on, each
epic began to become more “Hollywoodized”, meaning the style needed to be improved
to be more glamorous and grand to impress the audience. Sets and props were
beautifully constructed to contain more colors, more elegant props, and even
more realistic features that would do up these films. Scenes such as
Cleopatra’s tomb contained large props and beautiful colors to add to the
needed feeling of the scene.
With the improvement of scenes and
props from the early films to the 1963 film, these movie epics were able to
capture grander scenes. More experience and a larger budget allowed for films
to posses more qualities that empowered the magnitude of the epic, while the
Hollywood sensation allowed them to capture a much larger audience.
407
Words
Nice job. I really like the topic you chose, it's fun envisioning the sets and props used in each movie. Your thesis is a very viable one, but the second body paragraph is completely inaccurate. In the 1959 Ben-Hur, not 1963, the ships were small models acted out in a tank with backdrops, however in the 1927 Ben-Hur actual ships filled with actual people in actual oceans were used (which also contradicts your argument, so keep that in mind!). You could probably talk about how technological advancements contributed to grander props and sets--I know this requires a little outside research, but it may add a level of evidence to add more stability to your claim.
ReplyDeleteThis a really great start. But as Kim said keep in mind the magnitude of the sets built for the 1927 Ben-Hur. I am pretty sure that film ended up costing more overall than the later films, so keep that in mind. Also maybe discuss how much more detail and research was put into the sets as well as money because a set can cost a lot of money but if there is no research put into it, the film will lack the sense of authenticity that so many of the directors and set builders craved.
ReplyDeleteI really like what you have! Your thesis is supported with good information and it seems very arguable. Like Kim and Jenny both said talking about how as technology advanced the props and sets probably advanced with it.
ReplyDeleteHere's a comment about sets from a lecture about "Cabiria" held at the Australian Film Institute by Tizziana Ferrero-Regis in 2010:(http://www.qagoma.qld.gov.au/cinematheque/cinema_resources/2010/the_historical_imagination_of_cabiria):
ReplyDelete"In the film, Pastrone did not use trompe l’oeil sets, but relied on the combination of the natural scenery of the Alps, Tunisia and Sicily, and life size sets to increase the effect of depth, which was further enhanced by tracking shots. The altar to the god Moloch was an open set, a stage construction of enormous proportions that was directly inspired by Art Nouveau and could physically accommodate hundreds of extras. The open set magnified and emphasized the historical events that are represented in the film. The employment of a large number of extras enabled the refinement of techniques such as deep focus and tracking shots. And especially, the open set allowed the use of depth in the mise-en-scene and of a larger frame."
In its own time, each of the films we watch broke records in terms of costs, number of extras, magnitude of sets, etc. That is already true for "Cabiria"'s enormous, life-size sets (see the quote I posted above), and was true for anything that came after it. Every movie also tried to use the latest techniques, if that was by filming some scenes in an experimental full-color process ("Ben Hur", 1925; two-strip Technicolor, to be exact) or in the various, constantly improving wide-screen formats, or ever grander and more realistic-looking sets, or more and more realistic or impressive-looking locations (e.g., the naval battle in the 1925 "Ben Hur" was filmed off the coast of Livorno, Italy; the scenes in Crassus' villa in "Spartacus" were partly filmed at Hearst Castle).
ReplyDeleteIn some cases, though, as Kim correctly notes, the earlier movies actually do a better job as the later ones in terms of realism and size of the sets. What I find interesting is how the earlier movies managed to overcome the constraint of missing color, say, and yet convey luxury and grandeur, or how the newer movies use not just color, but the symbolism of color to impress certain subliminal messages on their viewers.