How Spielberg Directs Your Attention
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 11. 2022
- Steven Spielberg is the the highest-grossing director in movie history. And now you'll learn his secret!
A master of composition, blocking, movement and camerawork, Spielberg combines all these techniques to make you, dear viewer, an attentive observer of every image he presents.
We'll talk about Reframing and COATs (my invented term for the Center of Attention) and how Spielberg uses them to make you pay attention to the screen for 100% of the running time, no matter if his subject is dinossaurs, the holocaust, aliens, amendment-ratifying, espionage, slavery or singing and dancing street gangs. Wow, this man has an expansive range.
We'll distill the precise Spielberg technique by going through perfectly arranged and blocked shots from "Schindler's List", "Munich", "West Side Story" and "Catch Me If You Can", with some room for "Lincoln", "Raiders of the Lost Ark", "Jurassic Park", "The Color Purple", "Amistad", "War of the Worlds", "E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial" and "Close Encounters of the Third Kind".
Copyright free images from Unsplash.
Copyright free music from Bensound. - Krátké a kreslené filmy
"He doesn't only directs the movie, he directs you!" - Uff! Goosebumps!
Uff is right! Double Uff!!
01:03 What is that music in the background? Anyone know the title and artist?
He doesn't only direct the movie; he directs YOU.
I'm stealing that for my novel writing!
This is similar to a video I saw on the "Spielberg Oner", where he manages to film in one shot, but, somehow, you don't really notice. Not like the flashy beginning of "The Player" or the Copa scene in "Goodfellas", where the directors (Altman and Scorcese, respectively) seem to be drawing attention to their shot, rather than just let it happen, seemingly, organically. Very well done, as usual.
Moviewise explained it better than Every Frame a Painting tho.
@@glenn.6202 I thought both videos were very well done. And I'm hoping that Moviewise will actually start getting some of the recognition and subscribers he deserves.
The videos explore different aspects of Spielberg's style, and both are great.
To be fair, the whole point of the long take in The Player was to draw attention to the shot and thus the process of filmmaking. It happens while the characters are discussing the opening shot of Touch of Evil. The whole movie is very meta like that
Yes well said
You're really excellent at this man. I hope to see you continue to upload videos, because you're easily one of the best analytical film channels on youtube.
Thank you for the comment! And a new video’s coming this Friday
@@Moviewise how to learn to get better at direction? how about a video on this?
@@junespoesy If you are a filmmaker these videos are nothing but an education in directing. You get good examples, and bad examples. Try to strive more to be like the good examples.
I am 68 years old and quite stupid. That’s why I love to learn new stuff, because for me, the world is full of it. Thanks for teaching me about coats. It made my day.
I´m stealing that first sentence for my future social introductions. That´s a great opener for a job applicaton.
2:33 the fact that he pulls his credentials wrong side out and shows the lady some leather kills me every time. So much character information in that small segment and also amazing acting.
i thinnk on the other side there's the fbi logo no??
@@mohdanasqureshi757 I feel, that's the joke, that's part of his clumsiness and nervousness. If you look closely, this is a folding leather wallet with plastic windows on the inside, like the one you might put a driver's licence in. He has his identification on the top with photo and his full FBI credentials on the bottom (both are seen upside down). The other side of this wallet is just the leather in my opinion. While you're right, we might be made to assume there could be a metal badge on the other side, I truly think Spielberg and Hanks played this as a character building joke - a guy so nervous about going in the field to apprehend a criminal, probably first time pulling out his gun... plus the way Spielberg frames the shot and hangs just a second on the wallet to allow the viewer to catch the joke. All planned to a tee IMO.
I just got schooled once again by Steven. After 30 years of studying this mans work I am still learning things from him. Thank you for this enlightening and well made video!
Excellent analysis of one of my favourite Directors of all time.
Spielberg was the man that drew my attention to movies. In 2013 I saw his first animated movie The Adventures of Tintin. For the first time in my life, I actually cared who directed the movie and since then he is my favorite. He truly is a magician!
Love the COAT nomenclature. Center of Attention. Focus. Like it. COAT!
What on earth are those videos in this channel, just discoverd it and this is amazing man, there's a lot of videos out there with a lot more views and a LOT less quality or even no quality or whatsoever. You deserve more views, from the lessons you give, the presentation, the editing, the sound and cristal clear way of talking, you are very talented man.
Subscribed, hope you get bigger.
I have been devouring this channel! This is extremely helpful for someone trying to learn how to direct. I would love to see videos on other auteurs like Tarantino and Wes Anderson. Whatever your opinion of them - I’m sure it will be entertaining!
This is the video I’m looking for..Perfect analysis
The advice in your channel is so great I literally use what I learn hear on every filming I do. I shoot concerts. I used to have multiple cameras now I do the whole gig with just one shot. Thanks forever
I noticed that camera move "COAT" technique in one of the opening shot's of Rick's bar in Casablanca. It follows a waiter around the room, with multiple sub points of interest and then does a beautiful handoff of to Sam's introduction as he is playing the piano. It's one of my favorite shots and I LOVE this breakdown of Spielberg's use of the technique. Very helpful. One other thing, props to T Hanks for holding the FBI badge in exactly the right place. Moving around to blocked points is one thing, but holding up an object in suspended space perfectly between a person's face and the camera WHILE IN MOTION YOURSELF needs a laser focus of attention.
Nice catch on Casablanca! I made a video about it ;)
czcams.com/video/Q9Sbc6BMkTQ/video.html
01:03 What is that music in the background? Anyone know the title and artist?
@@Moviewise 01:03 What is that music in the background? Anyone know the title and artist?
@@EbonyPope Fingerprint by Mini Vandals. Next time ask in a comment instead of a reply.
@@Moviewise Thank you. Why in a comment instead of a reply? I thought if I reply to one of your comments you are more likely to see it. Most creators aren't very active in the comment section.
Your voice sounds very much like Yul Brynner!
These 'coat' shots are also linked to what is known as the rule of thirds in cinemaphotography.
Lovely final summation "he doesn't only direct the movie, he directs you".
2:30 Hanks doesn't actually show the cleaning lady anything, because his credentials are backwards. Spielberg knows it's more effective to show the audience
To show Hank's character's incompetence.
No. It’s the front and back covers that have the official badge and the letters “FBI” written on them. That’s what you’d flash to someone to quickly authenticate yourself, not the details on the inside.
@@davecorry7723More his nervousness/excitement. If I recall correctly he was a desk jockey and this was his first time in the field.
"...he directs you." What a closer!
Your videos are like drugs. I can't get enough!
You're the best, dude. Your account should have millions of subs.
Amazing channel, very underrated and well put together content.
The COAT example in catch me if you can is similar to a scene in wolf of Wall Street where the concept of a rathole is explained. You first focus on the money bag then on Brad, then on Brad meeting belfort, then on Brad ignoring Jonah hill, then on belfort taking the bag to the golf cart, then finally closing in on the money bag and its contents.
Two legendary directors using the same method.
Couldn’t find a CZcams vid for reference, so here’s the minute mark from the actual film 1:05:10
He's is this centuries GOAT🤝💯
This was a brilliant Watch, thank you so so much!!!
You 're on point as always, keep it up mate !
So informative. Thank you.
Brilliant video that uncovers the secrets of a brilliant director.
Absolutely magnificent video. Thank you very much for such explanations of movie art.
Excellent!
what a genius u r man, amazing analysis, AWESOME!!
Brilliant! I learned a ton
Great video!!
really like your channel and how you explain things
One could get addicted to your voice
Nice video.
Great analysis! I wonder if one might see an ideological undercurrent in this style of filmmaking…. There is no alternative to the story you are being presented. Everything in the image is under the director’s autocratic control, leaving no space for the viewer to wander down his own path. Not to say it’s not effective, but it can feel a bit claustrophobic at times. I think, in general, I prefer styles that are more humanistic and uplifting. I like to breathe more! 😅
This thought came to my mind as well.
Those who dislike Spielberg usually say his films are emotionally manipulative. It makes sense to say that his style is visually manipulative, which I don’t think is a bad thing at all.
I could imagine someone saying this kind of attention guiding dumbs down the audience, because there’s no room to form your own mind about what’s on screen, meaning that both story and visuals are spoonfed.
Though I don’t think that it’s a bad thing (whatever is hard to do deserves praise in my book, and Hitchcock used to do just about the same thing), it would indeed make sense.
@@Moviewise I think it's all right to be visually manipulative, since movie viewing is an innately passive act. You go to the movies to be told a story, not to participate in one. Even in a mystery, where there's a subtle invitation to the viewer to be the solver, the director still controls the input that your brain analyzes.
This is a great video. It makes you see that Spielberg is not necessarily a genius, it's just that he's extremely fluent in the language of film. The writer writes, but with his direction, Spielberg tells the story.
Also, I've always thought that Spielberg has a sort of misanthropic quality. Think of Jaws. His crowd shots at the beach when the mayor cajoles that town leader to go into the water. This is a fat old man with a big belly, sauntering into the water with his aging wife and his grandchildren. Then everyone else goes in, girls in bikinis, young men laughing and running, little kids playing, parents working at creating a "good time," old ladies gossiping. See these oblivious Americans, so decadent in clinging to normality, seeking pleasure while this threat looms out there, ready to strike.
Then the family's house in "Close Encounters." It's a mess. The kids are out of control. The dinner table is chaos.
We're supposed to look at these things and think: normal life. But upon further viewings, you start to think" these stupid, careless, ugly people.
Maybe that's part of his use of camera movement. He tells you what to look at and in the brief moment, your mind tells you how to feel about what you're seeing. But look at it long enough and he's telling you something different.
@@VinceLyle2161 Think Spielberg has said that Close Encounters was influenced by his parents divorce - the Close Encounters thing might not necessarily be intentionally judging the family members, just reproducing and possibly exaggerating his own perceptions and memories of such tensions. Plus setting the scene for Dreyfuss's character to fall out with his wife later on, and drift away from the family.
Is it possible that the judgement comes from you, rather than Spielberg?
There's a family squabble at the start of ET but I am sure that's not meant to be judgemental of the family - it's more interesting than watching a harmonious family, it shows that life is tough for a single mother, and of course it provides contrast to the whole family coming together later in the movie.
@@MichaelHayes_s6 It is possible the judgement comes from me. I could be misinterpreting his concept of typical American scenes of the 70's and early 80's as depicting ugliness and decadence. And it's not a criticism, by the way. If he was giving American culture of that time the side eye, however subtly, it adds to the movies instead of subtracting from them.
Strangely, that seems to go away entirely in the 80's and 90's, after Raiders of the Lost Ark. From then on, he either does dramas from a specific time period (The Color Purple, Empire of the Sun, Amistad, Lincoln) or movies where any cultural criticism would be irrelevant (Indiana Jones, Always, Jurassic Park, etc.) He moved on from big movies to huge movies (partly because he was involved) and his scope either became smaller (a platoon in WW2) or more stylized (a con man in the 60's). The messiness of daily life in his earlier efforts no longer needed to be depicted.
@@Moviewise I think he is a superb director but he has many, many negatives. For me, he gives sentiment a bad name and I love films that have earned the right to tug at the heart strings. When Elliot cried in ET and Schindler broke down is his false speech at the end of Schindler's List, they left me cold. I prefer that the director and his cast don't cry as a manipulation but allow the audience to feel it, the way the greats; Capra, Wyler and even Kazen in A Tree Grows in Brooklyn did. Sometimes the actor will even face away (Detective Story), or down (12 Angry Men). Even in Schindler's List, he had to have the colour present day bookends with the survivors, as if the audience might not figure out that the escapees could procreate and replenish themselves.
Then there is the waste of talent. He bought Rosebud and said it would keep him honest and nor get into making remakes and sequels. And then he goes and does three mechanical follow-up Indy films, The Lost World and a remakes of A Guy Named Joe and West Side Story. And all his studio has made, after American Beauty, have been, a virtual run of unmitigated crap, polluting the screens with Transformers series and other low grade kiddie fare.
He also, seriously, lacks depth - which is to be expected being a child of television. Earlier generations had as daily influences slick and pulp magazines by the greatest writers o the century in monthly magazines that were on the tables of households, with often stunningly composed illustrative artwork, then there was the golden age of radio drama (Suspense - from which Hitch hired several screenwriters, Escape, X-mine one, Welles and Corwin). there was theater and vaudeville and the paperback revolution in the '50s. Spielberg had the one-eyed monster in the corner. The reason he read the Colour Purple was "because it was a thin book." He is a wonderful director but also very, very shallow. When NBC gave him a two season commitment and a million dollar for each episode of his Twilight Zone inspired series Amazing Stories, it was a catastrophe. Having bought the rights to use the name of the famous pulp and the stories in it, they didn't use one. All the ideas were his, such a boy becomes magnetised. Hitchcock was a reader and his show, ran for ten years, adapting stories from all the magazines and even as far back as The Strand Magazine. Depth, depth, depth.
He himself, hasn't made a great movie since Munich.
Still saying all that, for me, he still has these in the top tier: Duel, Jaws, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Schindler's List, Munich
Excellent analysis. I can't believe you don't have more views and subscribers and likes and all those numbers, especially after threatening them with the gun at the end!
Yes, this style is genius, but there are plenty of people in the audience who would like to see the camera linger longer so beauty and detail can register. Excessive 'Spielberg' can cause headaches. It would be nice to see you cover a director who creates through balance.
Your "like" and "subscribe" gag at yhe end had me wishing I could subscribe again. 😂
This is a great video, but for the love of god PLEASE use the ding sound less, and when you do turn the volume down. It makes it really hard to focus
Valeu!
Thank you!
gj man :)
01:03 What is that music in the background? Anyone know the title and artist?
Which movie is at 03:24? Looks like Tom Cruise being held at gunpoint in the rain. Don't remember any Spielberg Cruise movie with a scene like that. Anybody knows?
War of the Worlds (2005)
I keep watching movies, thinking, "This is good!" and then seeing the Spielberg credit at the end.
"Oh, that explains all the interesting directing."
Case in point: Home Alone. What a masterpiece of direction.
Steve
About I versing with you , the way I verse with you possible showing a healthier way in englshing
Yet
If I was aquainted with you in a much closer way
In event I didn't like an event , I walk away
In event I didn't like a verse , I walk away
I isn't aquainted with you in a very close way
In away
Steve I's nervous protected
I nervous protected
----------------
Marwan
What's the movie at 1:03?
Coat? You say blocking this the other video? 😅
For all his visual mastery Spielberg's movies always seem hollow. His movies tend to have two kinds of characters, evil ones and dull ones. What was the point of the scene with Hanratty awkwardly frightening the maid or the scene with Schindler flashing his money in such an arrogant manner? That said, good video.
In Catch Me If You Can it shows that Hanratty, a desk jockey, is anxious on his first field job.
In Schindler's List it shows Schindler bluffing his way into Nazi officers inner circle using money (his last), charisma and swagger. That intro scene to Schindler essentially shows his character and the methods he will use to save people.
This is about 20% of what's happening. It's not reframing, it's about controlling the allegiance of the audience as the balance of power shifts between characters. Hitchcock and Truffaut discuss it in their interviews in the 60s.
It's good he did only one Musical.
Problematic those for cinematic artists like him. Maybe tedious is the better word
When he closes the documents, it seems to be black on the side pointing at the waitress. Was she seeing anything there or was he just showing the documents to the audience?
It shows that he was so focused on catching the suspect that he rushed and didn’t get time to properly align the ID to the waitress. It elevates the urgency and shows where his focus is on the scene
I love Spielberg's directing but I actually felt his style didn't suit West Side Story. It sucked the life out of the film for me. The original film version towers above it.
Too many loud dings in this video.
The post-coital lady joke earned you a subscription
The problem I have with Spielberg are his stories. Let aside the ‘80s and ‘90s, I barely can name a Spielberg’s movie I liked very much.
In one of the examples you show. Tom Hanks doesn't actually show his FBI credentials to the maid. The audience gets to see his credentials, but all the time, only the back of the wallet was towards the maid... but i get, making movies is hard. I dont make movies, but i paint pictures. When i do them, i gotta concentrate on so many things, that after hours of doing it, i get blind to the most obvious problems.
It’s the front and back covers that have the official badge and the letters “FBI” written on them. That’s what you’d flash to anyone to quickly authenticate yourself, not the details on the inside.
It's a character moment showing how nervous he is. It isn't a mistake.
@@richardcahill1234You know what, I just googled what an FBI identity card and official badge holding leather case looks like, and turns out you are right and I was wrong. There’s nothing on the outside. So yeah, just a character moment. Thanks.
Спилберг это режиссер, который был убит и клонирован в роботов.
I see what you did there. You directed me to subscribe - hihihi