Watch F.W. Murnau's Nosferatu and compare and contrast it with The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. Read Roger Ebert's essay on Murnau's masterpiece, his essay on Caligari , and Krakauer's essay "From Caligari to Hitler." Discuss the Expressionistic mise-en-scene of both films and how they represent Germany before the rise of Hitler and WWII. Include at least one quote from each essay. Your response should be a minimum of 3 paragraphs. Be sure to write cinematically.
Two cinematic masterpieces that have large influences on German expressionism are: "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" and "Nosferatu." These films are very similar, but also different, in terms of their mise-en-scene and how they represent Germany before Hitler's reign and WWII. Elements such as costume, makeup, set, design, etc. allow these wacky narratives to come to life and leave an impact on the audience.
ReplyDeleteRobert Ebert states, "The first thing everyone notices and best remembers about "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" (1920) is the film's bizarre look." The set is distorted, the angles are sharp, and the walls/windows are tilted to create a whole new world. Many of the actors wear heavy, dark makeup on their faces to create a contrast between light and dark, because the film is not in color. This enhances the creepy, eerie mood the audience gets from the film. When Robert Ebert discusses "Nosferatu," he says, "Much of the film is shot in shadow. The corners of the screen are used more than is ordinary; characters lurk or cower there, and it's a rule of composition that tension is created when the subject of a shot is removed from the center of the frame." This film also makes the audience feel uneasy while watching. Just as in Caligari, the characters in Nosferatu wear heavy makeup to make their character stand out. However, the setting of Nosferatu is a bit more realistic. The buildings aren't distorted in this film, just the character's minds.
These movies are a great representation of German filmmaking before the rise of Hitler. Especially "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari." In Krakauer's essay "From Caligari to Hitler" he writes, "Caligari initiates a long procession of 100 percent studio-made films. Whereas, for instance, the Swedes at that time went to great pains to capture the actual appearance of a snowstorm or a wood, the German directors, at least until 1924, were so infatuated with indoor effects that they built up whole landscapes within the studio walls." Before 1924, (and before Hitler's reign), German expressionist films were shot on a set, so the filmmakers could create any type of parallel universe they wished, without having to rely on the not-so-reliable mother nature. But once Hitler came into power, filmmakers begin documenting the series of unfortunate events that Germany was during that time period. So the creative alternate universe that people had used as an escape from reality before, was not as popular. Because their reality needed to be documented.
Overall, both German expressionist films, "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" and "Nosferatu" have similarities and differences about their mise-en-scene. Also, how they represent German filmmaking pre-WWII.
The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Nosferatu both come from the period in film history none as the period of German Expressionism. Since both of these films were born out of the same time period of film making, they are bound to have some of the similarities that tie The German Expressionistic era together, shown through the mise-en-scene of both films. However the films also have major differences in their mise-en-scene, especially in how it affects the verisimilitude of both films in comparison. The Expressionistic era is also said to show cinematically a representation of Germany before Hitler rose to power with the Third Reich.
ReplyDeleteThe Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Nosferatu both have similar aspects in their mise-en-scene that make them both German Expressionism films. Both films incorporate uneasiness and an off kilter feeling within their mise-en-scene. In The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, the mise-en-scene includes props and settings and backgrounds that are off balance. The painted backgrounds show buildings that go up at odd angles, off balance windows, and buildings that aren’t proportional. Roger Ebert says that “"Caligari" is said to be the first example in cinema of German Expressionism, a visual style in which not only the characters but the world itself is out of joint.” Similarly Nosferatu uses this same idea that comes from German Expressionism, just a little less dramatically in the setting when compared to The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. The film typically uses more lighting to show that the world is “out of joint” having the high contrasted shadows during the scene while Hutter is in the inn and while he is in the castle of Nosferatu. These plus the contrasting angles of light, and deceiving depth in the dark hallways where Nosferatu comes out from, give us the feeling that something is really unnatural about this place, because of what all these people are talking about, all about werewolves and vampires lurking around Transylvania. Another factor that adds to this German Expressionistic feel to the film is the appearance of Nosferatu, and how he looks “off center” to the rest of the characters. Including his appearance, which Roger Ebert describes him as “more like an animal than a human being; the art direction by Murnau's collaborator, Albin Grau, gives him bat ears, claw like nails and fangs that are in the middle of his mouth like a rodent's, instead of on the sides like on a Halloween mask.” and the other factors in the mise-en-scene, Murnau creates the feeling of unease with this particular character and the setting in which he surrounds himself in..
All these factors within the mise-en-scene of both films show this “off balance” type of world that is German Expressionism, exists within both films. But the way they portray this idea is different, and this affected the verisimilitude of both of the films. The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari is not very verisimilar because of how extreme it goes into making the world of the narrative seem to be “off balance.” The backgrounds are painted onto the walls, shadows are painted on the walls, the rest of the set seems to be un-proportional to the characters and encloses them in, giving us that uneasy feeling but not making us truly believe in the world of the story. This could be done on purpose though, because we don’t want to believe that this is happening, that we can’t trust the people in the story, which it turns out in the end that we can’t when we find out the whole story was just made up by the man who just happened to be insane in an insane asylum. So this film isn’t very verisimilar, while Nosferatu is a lot more verisimilar. This film has a lot more realistic feel to it then The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari does.
Most of the film is on sets that are a lot more believable than the sets in The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, with lots of nice furniture and wall papers, beautifully decorated houses, and in this film there are actually shots that take place outside. This gives us, starting off, the ability to believe in the world of the narrative. When our main character Hutter goes to the inn at Transylvania there is a change in the mise-en-scene that catches our attention as the viewer. The lighting seems to be a lot darker, as they talk about things like Vampires and Werewolves, and because of these things he can’t go outside at night time. Also the people’s reaction to him going up to the castle gives us the feeling that there might be something unnatural about the castle where the count lives. When he finally gets to the castle we find that this castle and everything inside, including Nosferatu, seem to be really unnatural and we have doubts about believing in them. However the natural world and unnatural worlds of the narrative come together at the end when Nosferatu enters the town where Hutter lives. This merging of these two different “worlds” create to us that maybe the world of vampires and stuff, seems a lot more real, because it has entered the more natural world in which we believed in before. This makes the aspects of the mise-en-scene seem to be more believable in the narrative.
ReplyDeleteThis period of German Expressionism evolved in the years prior to the rein of Hitler. The mise-en-scene of both films seems to be a representation of the state of Germany right before Hitler had gained power in Germany. The German Expressionistic Era is all about the “off balance” feeling of the film, created through aspects of the mise-en-scene. This has come to represent the time after World War I where the people of Germany are feeling uneasy about everything that is going on around him, because of the subjected state that they have been put in after the War. This could in a way be a prediction of the rise of Hitler, because they needed a strong leader to take this uneasy feeling and unsure feeling that they have away from them.
So that is how the two German Expressionistic films, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Nosferatu are similar and different, when you compare their mise-en-scene and verisimilitudes, and how their mise-en-scenes where a symbolic representation of the minds of the Germanic people after the World War I and before the rise of Hitler.
second half
DeleteThe two silent films “The Cabinet Of Doctor Caligari”(1920) and “Nosferatu”(1922) are very similar and different to each other regarding their German expressionistic traits. This could also lead to different perspectives of Germany before the rise of Hitler and WWII. In German expressionism, there are many aspects that differ these types of films dramatically from all the other films in the film business. In a German Expressionistic film, one would look for over-exaggerated make-up, distorted scenes, coloring of film, and sometimes a scary aura given out to the viewers.
ReplyDeleteFor “The Cabinet Of Dr.Caligari”, everything mentioned above is involved greatly with the film. As said before, everything is over exaggerated to make it look like an out of this world place which is what the two directors of the film had believed what Germany was like. The make-up design of practically every character adds drama to the scary aura. It makes the viewer feel uncomfortable. The character that gives the most impact with his makeup is Caligari himself. The moment when the others find out that the director of the mental institution is Caligari, his makeup is extremely exaggerated which is what one of the shots are primarily about. Also adding to the scary aura is the scene and set up design. Overall nothing looks realistic in the scenes. It is so non-realistic that it is hard for the viewer to get used to the area in the plot and makes the viewer feel uncomfortable. Also none of the scenes are done with almost any real objects or areas(except for furniture)In Siegfried Kracauer’s essay, “From Caligari to Hitler” he mentions the creator of these distortions: “Janowitz suggested that the settings for Caligari be designed by the painter and illustrator Alfred Kubin who, a forerunner of the surrealists, made eerie phantoms invade harmless scenery and visions of torture emerge from the subconscious.” The different coloring of different scenes in the film explains the mood of the scene at that moment/ the area of it. Since movement was not particularly used back in the silent movie era, there was not much of it. But there was one scene with all the scientists reading Caligari’s diary where it was necessary to create a pan( I just realized pan is short for panorama! ) shot in order to fit all of them in one single shot. Not really movement, but the directors also used many iris shots throughout. “Wiene is fond of the iris shot, which opens or closes upon a scene like an eye. This makes the point that we are looking and are privileged to witness events closed to other people.” This, stated by Roger Ebert in his assay of Caligari, is also an aspect of Germany’s history.
“ Nosferatu” could be described as “the other side of German expressionism” where the scenes are processed in rel areas, and the color schemes are used to push forward a different meaning to the audience. Instead of representing place, the colors represent time: yellow being afternoon/ light from another source other than the sun, pink being sunrise, blue being night time, and probably green being sunset but it is unknown to me because I believe that the green film is supposed to represent the action of the scary aura taking place where Count Orlok is making his move as a vampire. Since most of the scenes are placed in real life and not in painted scenes, the framing is more open and comfortable to the viewer. To me, the most uncomfortable aspect was the coloring because at sometimes one could not see much of anything because of how bright the coloring is.
Overall, these two films basically have the same aspects of german expressionism but are used differently
Similarities and differences between The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Nosferatu, both German expressionist (and two of the earliest horror) films are abundant, and reflect not only the cinematic nature of the time but the general mise-en-scene, brought out by costume, set, design, and lighting arguably had a direct impact on Germany before WWII and the rise of Hitler.
ReplyDeleteBefore much is said about The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, Robert Ebert describes the film as “bizarre” and describes that “these radical distortions immediately set the film apart from all earlier ones, which were based on the camera's innate tendency to record reality.” Indeed, the film is quite bizarre. Tilted and jagged walls give the film a surreal look, changing the way we view the characters as well as the situation; sometimes the characters look cramped, in other times they seem to tower above other characters, simply due to the distortions we see. Since this technically is a “scary” movie, this distortion does create a scary effect especially when we see Césare, our somnambulist, running through it. In addition to the walls being off balance, the props are also off balance to add to the topsy-turvy nature of the world. Next, the lighting was a key feature of the film, as soft-tone lighting was primarily used; stark shadows were usually cast on the faces of Dr. Caligari and Cesare to show their hidden dark sides. Additionally, costume served the purpose of adding reality, as well as distorting reality. The characters we’d deem “normal” are dressed in clothing of the era while Dr. Caligari and Cesare are made to look crazed, Caligari in his multiple layers, with uncontrolled hair and spectacles, and Cesare with his dark facial makeup surrounding his eyes and coating his lips. To contrast, Nosferatu also has some of these elements, but definitely in a more subtle nature. While the film doesn’t have all the jagged architecture (which, in a way, gives it a more realistic look anyways), it still captures attention with changes in lighting, as well as general design. When Hutter goes to visit Count Orlock, the lighting gets dimmer, especially after he realize the horror the townspeople have for things such as vampires and werewolves. The change in color of the lighting is also a significant aspect. While the entire film is in black and white, some scenes are given pink, yellow, or even blue hues to change the mood and alter our vision of the film. Shadows also play a large role in the film, especially as we see Nosferatu’s hands and then whole body creeping up the stairs (but we never see his body itself). Like Caligari, the characters in Nosferatu dress according to their “character.” Nosferatu wears a long, dark cloak and is made more terrifying by his distorted face containing his defined, triangular nose, and pointed teeth.
Both of these films represent an era of expressionism and advances in the arts before the rise of Hitler. The films contain almost a helter-skelter feeling, as in both films there is a crazed murderer going around (both killing for different reasons, of course). This could, of course, represent the feelings of the German peoples following World War I and their large and costly reparations. It is this kind of outlet that led to the rise in a leader whose “primary” goal was to unite the German peoples once more. While Siegfried Kracauer was fairly confident that Caligari directly predicted the rise of Hitler (Hitler being Caligari and the population being the somnambulist), I believe it’s hard to say for certain whether or not one film could predict the rise of the Third Reich.
Of “Caligari” director Robert Wiene, Roger Ebert said “He is making a film of delusions and deceptive appearances, about madmen and murder, and his characters exist at right angles to reality. None of them can quite be believed, nor can they believe one another.” This could be viewed as a very blanket statement about German expressionism as a genre. The sets are unrealistic and jagged and 2 dimensional, shadows are exaggerated for meaning. The themes of German Expressionism are those of madness or insanity and betrayal. This is an intellectual shift from standard action and romance movies of the time. The characters in “The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari” are in fact dealing with matters of insanity and murder when searching for the sleeping killer and they are skewed in personality and strange. This is created by a few means. The costumes- the characters are all swallowed up by their garments. Although fairly realistic, the clothing seems to cover up the real person wearing it. The sets and lighting are probably more important though. The sets are strange, two dimensional, elongated and exaggerated in other ways. They are as rough and unreal as possible without losing sight of what is being represented. It is key that sets were used- not any outdoor shooting- so the movie appears artificial. As for the lighting, it can make a real impression and some real implications. The lighting of the somnambulist’s face or Dr. Caligari’s cramped little room are some prime examples.
ReplyDelete“Nosferatu” is a less extreme version of German Expressionism. It certainly deals with the themes as Roger Ebert says “Murnau's film is about all of the things we worry about at 3 in the morning--cancer, war, disease, madness.” However, it is shot in a more real environment- outside, in real buildings and a seemingly real town. This is very different from “Caligari” because the setting of “Nosferatu” does not look artificial and uncomfortable, but real and picturesque. Something about the choices made for the setting and costume and lighting of this film make it feel like a dream, which makes the narrative all the more shocking and haunting.
In the context of film, German Expressionism is one of the most important sects of work because it led to so much else in horror and film noir. But, we must also note the context of the films themselves, when they were made, where they were made, and how that could have affected the final product. In this case, the films were made in Germany, which as a country was very isolated in the time following WWI leading to WWII. The isolation may have given German filmmakers the freedom to experiment without having to compete with more mainstream films. Krakauer pointed out that the use of sets like in “Caligari” was part of the general German retreat into a shell. Some of the absurd choices were made also in lei of a lavish budget. Krakauer also makes connections in his book from WWI to German Expressionism to propaganda films directly to WWII and the rise of Hitler.
The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari directed by Robert Wiene and Nosferatu directed by F. W. Murnau are both two classic films highly influenced by German Expressionism before the rise of Hitler and WWII, and is clearly and explicitly shown through the mise-en-scene of each film. Both adopt many similarities that adopt the German Expressionist ideals apparent in classic German films, but also differ in what makes both films truly unique. The use of these techniques put both of these films at the top of their class, and makes them much worthy of representing Germany.
ReplyDeleteBoth films share very similar aspects of Expressionistic mise-en-scene. One thing that I would like to take note of is the fact that both films would change the hue of the movie over time, depending on the mood of the area or particular event occurring onscreen. It’s not really expressionistic, but it was an interesting similarity that I found between the two films. However, both evoke strange feelings of suspiciousness and sinister thoughts within the viewer, and lighting is manipulated in a dark and disturbing way, which is what the German audience was looking for. Kracauer stated that “ The films of a nation reflect its mentality in a more direct way than other artistic media for two reasons: First, films are never the product of an individual…Second, films address themselves, and appeal, to the anonymous multitude “. I believe that both films easily achieved this through the use of German ideals that carried out some of the customs that the general audience can relate to.
Caligari differs from Nosferatu in a few ways, however. One, Caligari had a much more extreme sense of distortion that Nosferatu did. The world of Caligari was really miss-shaped and unrealistic, with its oddly shaped structures and windows and walls and tables. Also, shadows were painted on the walls and heavy makeup was used to highlight the strangeness of the world itself. Even Roger Ebert stated in his essay on the film that, “ The first thing everyone notices and best remembers about "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari" (1920) is the film's bizarre look “. On the other hand, Nosferatu takes a more relatable and realistic world, and crosses it with a darker, more “Caligari-like” world. The manipulation of lighting and shadows in the film helped to make Count Orlok’s setting much more creepy and un-natural. However, when Nosferatu enters the world of the protagonist, it immerses the audience and actually makes them believe in the idea of the “Vampire Lord entering the human world”. Just as Ebert notes, I think that the film is more concerned with it’s applicable atmospheric ideals that tie to German Expressionism than it’s ability to surprise me: “Is Murnau's ``Nosferatu'' scary in the modern sense? Not for me. I admire it more for its artistry and ideas, its atmosphere and images, than for its ability to manipulate my emotions like a skillful modern horror film…But ``Nosferatu'' remains effective: It doesn't scare us, but it haunts us. It shows not that vampires can jump out of shadows, but that evil can grow there, nourished on death.”
Caligari and Nosferatu are both very effective films that immerse us into imaginary worlds through the use of German Expressionism. Their ideals show that scare doesn’t need to originate in sudden pops and gore that’s very apparent in modern day films, but can frighten you through the growth of “evil in the shadows”. Horror films today could learn a thing or two from these classic German films.
In the years during the rise of the Nazi party and Hitler in Germany, German expressionism was on the rise. The German Expressionist style made use of a very skewed and insane reality, and dived into the minds of creators of these movies. Films made at the time portrayed exactly how the country was feeling during this time, in many different ways. Robert Wiene's The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) and F.W. Murnau's Nosferatu (1922) are both prime examples of this. There are many similarities and differences between the two movies.
ReplyDeleteIn the years during the rise of the Nazi party and Hitler in Germany, German expressionism was on the rise. The German Expressionist style made use of a very skewed and insane reality, and dived into the minds of creators of these movies. Films made at the time portrayed exactly how the country was feeling during this time, in many different ways. Robert Wiene's The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (1920) and F.W. Murnau's Nosferatu (1922) are both prime examples of this. There are many similarities and differences between the two movies.
The main difference between these two movies is the amount of insanity the directors and director of photography injects into the reality and sets of the films. In Caligari, the world seems topsy-turvy, windows at odd angles, doors shaped like unnatural polygons. It seems, in this world, as everything is fake and could fall apart at any moment, which may in fact have been a metaphor for Germany at the time. In Nosferatu, on the other hand, the landscape and background seems much more real, and not as insane as Caligari. It doesn’t look on hundred percent real, but again, this may have been that director’s view of Germany, that it was in the process of becoming real and powerful again, which sort of happened.
There are also some similarities between the two films. In the films, dark shadows are used a lot. In both, they used a lot of facepaint/mascara on the villain (the somnobulist in Dr Caligari) to illustrate their evil inclinations. They also paint shadows throughout both of the films. On top of the sets, this adds another layer of mystery and a slight imperfectness in the worlds of the respective movies.
These two movies, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Nosferatu both were made in the German expressionist cinematic time period in Germany, during the rise of Hitler and the Nazi Party. This influenced their films and had a big impact on certain aspects in the film.
Robert Wiene’s The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and F.W. Murnau’s Nosferatu share several basic aspects of mise-en-scene and German Expressionism that are a result of the era in which they were created. These two films originated before World War II and Hitler’s rise in power, and this can be seen through how Germany is portrayed. Though they are only two years apart, there are multiple differences within the cinematic techniques that are adopted by each director.
ReplyDeleteThroughout The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, the strange and unrealistic surroundings are very striking, and makes the viewers feels as though they are in a different world. Since this film was shot in a studio set, the background and all of the buildings had to be created and painted to fit the vision of the director. This can be seen in Dr. Caligari’s house and other background buildings, which are extremely crooked and barely have any 90 degree angles. The black shadows, which were also painted onto the set, are very unbelievable as well. In Roger Ebert’s essay about the film, he says “I imagine some viewers indeed felt squeezed, turned and adjusted by the imagines”, which explains one of the ways in which German Expressionism is shown in this classic film.
The 1922 film Nosferatu, also uses thick shadows and weird camera angles to convey the horror type feeling. The main difference is that Murnau shot this film on an actual location and used real shadows. With this more realistic feel, verisimilitude is much easier to achieve by the viewers, because there is a more spacial feel within the mise-en-scene, and we do not feel cramped in a small room. This is seen all throughout the film, whether it be nature or inside of the huge castle. We are able to believe Nosferatu more because the only unrealistic character Count Orlok.
When Hitler came into power, German Expressionism began to fade away, and the rise of Nazi propaganda began. Many filmmakers glamorized Hitler in their work (political interference) , and films were being created for mainly popularity, taking away from the artistic and creative aspect of making films. Also, when the war began, Germany had a dark period, with economic and political corruption. The director of The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari was able to come up with such brilliant styles by trying new things that no one else has done before, even if it did not please the audience.
The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Nusferatu are very similar in many ways, as well as having some differences between them. The mise-en-scene is a mojor reason why the films are both different and similar. Costume and makeup are other features in both films that separate them from each other as well as bring them together.
ReplyDeleteThe Cabinet of Dr. Caligari was very bizarre looking and seemed very unrealistic. As Robert Ebert stated, “the first thing everyone notices and best remembers about The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari is the films bizarre look.” Buildings are misshaped, windows or at an angle, and it visually looks awkward and strange. Whereas in Nusferatu, the buildings and windows look much more realistic than in the Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. The use of painted on shadows were also used more excessively in the cabinet of Dr. Cligari then in Nusferatu.
Similarities however are much more apparent between these two films. In both films, painted on shadows are used to an extent, even though they are used more excessively in the Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. Another thing used in both movies is the very German expressionistic thing of using a ton of makeup on the main problem or “bad guy” of the story. In Nusferatu, the vampire had a ton of makeup on, giving him a strong sense of significance to the viewers as well as Dr. Caligari in the Cabinet of Dr. Caligari.
Nosferatu by F.W. Murnau and The Cabinet of Dr Caligari by Robert Wiene are both cinematically similar and different in many ways. The differences and similarities are mostly in mise-en-scene (sets, costumes, and makeup), but there were also some references to the time the films were made.
ReplyDeleteThe first difference AND similarity between the two that i noticed is that both have very angular designs of mise-en-scene, but while Caligari was made so angular and sharp it prevented the audience from identifying with the film, Nosferatu included realistic aspects and an actual environment. Caligari was entirely on-set and never really seemed to be a real world. I think that Ebert was very right when he said that Murnau 'is in awe of its material. [He] seems to really believe in vampires' because Murnau's film, especially in contrast to Wiene's Caligari, seemed to try and make the film with verisimilitude. Caligari on the other hand was a ‘jagged landscape of sharp angles and tilted walls and windows, staircases climbing crazy diagonals, trees with spiky leaves, grass that looks like knives.’ And in complete agreement with Ebert, ‘These radical distortions immediately set the film apart from [others], which were based on the camera's innate tendency to record reality.’
One reason Caligari could be such an alien environment goes back to the German Expressionist Era when ‘the German directors... were so infatuated with indoor effects that they built up whole landscapes within the studio walls.’ This seems to explain why the set seems so unnatural, because that’s what they were aiming for! The directors wanted images and sets to seem as different from nature as possible, and to accomplish this HAD to build their own sets rather than to depend on ‘a haphazard world.’
The strongest similarity between the two films is the ability to detail a dark event’s occurrence without actually showing the event using shadow. In Caligari the first murder the audience ‘witnesses’ is shown using shadow’s on a wall. When Orlok first approaches Hutter (whom i at first thought was ‘Butter’ from the scriptic font), in Nosferatu, his figure isn’t shown except in shadows overwhelming Hutter- As the shadow climbs up the wall, Hutter crawls further and further under his sheets. This is a very deliberate manipulation of light to affect the audience even more than if it had just shown the event. With this deliberation the action is both witnessed, but also contains underlying implications of mystery, like ‘who?’ and ‘why?’ and ‘what exactly happened?,’ this very effectively leaves the audience in speculation and suspense.
Even though The Cabinet of Caligari and Nosferatu come from the same time period and the same country, both being German expressionist films, they are very different, though they do share some similarities.
ReplyDeleteThe Cabinet of Caligari is a film about a man named Caligari who commandeers control of a somnambulist named Cesar through sheer force of will. He uses the captive Cesar to preform heinous acts, even to the extent of murder. Nosferatu is a tale about a vampire, named Count Orlok, who plans to move to a village where he can feast on the villagers, but is ultimately thwarted by a young woman. One of the first similarities one notices is the technique the filmmakers use to express time of day. They died the film stock certain colors (blue for night, yellow for day, amber for dawn/dusk) to show the differing amounts of light. While this wasn't an idea used solely by expressionists, they knew how to use this technique masterfully in conjunction with their shadowing to enhance the films ambiance. While on the topic of shadows, both films mise-en-scene relied heavily on shadow, be it Ornok's shadow falling across his soon to be victim's, or "Caligari"'s use of artificial shadows that arched and splayed about to convey a sense of mental instability. An interesting similarity between the films had to do with the costumes used for the characters. In both films, the antagonists (or antagonist's tool) had extremely dark and obvious dark make up around their eyes, which added a sense of foreboding and discomfort. Another similarity is that at times when characters are having their wills bent, their faces lose emotion and become very straight, showing that even facial expression can play an important role in mise-en-scene.
With similarities also come differences. A huge difference between the two films is also a huge aspect of mise-en-scene. The entire visual aspect of each film was hugely different from the other. Caligari, a story that turns out to be the factitious tale of a psych ward patient, is, throughout the entire story, hugely slanted, disproportional, and disconcerting. Hans Janowitz, author of this story, came from Prague a "city where reality fuses with dreams, and dreams turn into visions of terror," which literally defines the style of Caligari. This visual style adds to the idea of instability. Nosferatu, on the other hand, is very realistic in it's mise-en-scene, all of the physical settings being believable and realistic. One similarity the settings had, though, aside from shadow use, was the utilization of stairways that apparently went no where, and having scenes where the characters would seem aimless or lost, to personify their mental states. One other difference in mise-en-scene would be one of the ways each film shows an object or person's significance. In Caligari, important objects were centered and brought to fill much of the screen. Nosferatu, on the other hand, relied heavily on the fish-eye effect, which would darken out unnecessary sections of the screen and circle objects of importance.
ReplyDeleteThese two films say a lot about pre-Hitler Germany. One of the biggest things these films would indicate would be a country that is afraid of being preyed upon. Both films sport a character, either main or important, who succumb to the pressure of a figure stronger than them, showing Germany's fear. Also, an important theme in Germany would seem to be mental health, as there are important characters who are shown to have mental health issues, or have implied mental health issues. Ebert says ""Caligari" creates a mindscape, a subjective psychological fantasy," which personifies our characters inner workings. Also, German's seem to have a fear of losing their wives (possibly literally or just their loved ones) to forces more powerful than them and outside of their hands, as the female love interest in both stories becomes a target for the predator. Two final conclusions that can be drawn from these films is that pre-Hitler Germany understood the concept that inactivity (shown in the films as sleep) would lead to ones own destruction and being pushed to things they wouldn't want, and that the German's feared what humans could be pushed to, and of human crime, as well as showing the fact that humans always need someone to point the finger at and give blame to (in both stories characters were incorrectly charged with crimes they didn't commit).