Topic 1 - Realism and Antirealism

 Realism is a style of filmmaking that strives to depict life exactly how it is. Through the use of minimal set design, unobtrusive lighting, and little in the way of stylization, the filmmakers create life-like situations that feel like they could actually happen. It’s not to say that realism lacks any sort of form, but there is a more conscious attempt to try to mask the immense amount of work that goes into the cinematography, framing, lighting, and color in a film production, to keep things grounded in reality. Some of the earliest examples of this style are the films of the Lumiere brothers. The Lumiere brothers were interested in everyday life, and many of their films are just that. Most of them are simply shots of ordinary, non actors, taking part in every day activities. These mini-documentaries are less focused on form or style than they are on the content depicted. The camera angles are simple and the lighting is rarely noticeable. This leads us to pay more attention to the content on screen, which in turn is more relatable and hits closer to home. This style of filmmaking exists on the opposite end of the spectrum from Antirealism.

    Antirealism is a style that intentionally deviates from the feel of everyday life to create fantastical and surreal worlds and situations. The term Antirealism is often used interchangeably with Formalism, as many of the filmmakers embracing this style focus equally as much on the form as the content, or even more so. Antirealism was more of direct response to the style of realism, while the term formalism is seen as the evolution of the style into it’s own category. These films embrace the technical aspects of filmmaking and use shot composition, sound, lighting, and color heavily, to enforce these fantastical worlds presented. An early example of Antirealism would be the George Melies film, A Trip to The Moon (1902). This film uses theatrical sets and painted backdrops, as well as costumes and special effects, so from the start, the audience is aware that this is not their world. Each shot is carefully framed and staged, which helps create an odd, otherworldly feel. In the remastered version of the film that we watched for class, the music and colorization further create this fantastical atmosphere. Our expectations of what comes next are very different than that of a Lumiere brothers film. In one of these pieces of realism, we’re grounded in real life from the beginning, and thus so are our expectations. But in a piece of antirealism, our expectations are much more vast as we feel like anything could happen, as we obviously do not inhabit these worlds.    

    By the late 1920s and early 1930s, filmmakers were less distant on this spectrum of realism and antirealism. Many filmmakers began to incorporate aspects of both styles into their work, and many filmmakers still continue this trend today. The Gold Rush (1925), is a film that straddles the line between these two concepts, and helped introduce this concept of combining both styles into productions. We have a world set in reality, the Klondike during the late 1800s gold rush. The film uses sets and costumes, but they feel authentic to this period and not fantastical or otherworldly, like those in A Trip to The Moon. Both of these productions built sets and crafted elaborate costumes, but Chaplin intentionally stays true to the reality of life in this period, while Melies goes for a far more dreamlike world. As these are actual actors and not ordinary people, the scenes are composed in a much more deliberate way than one of the mini documentaries of the Lumiere brothers. There is careful staging and often over the top performances, but none of the characters or events ever really feel out of place. There is a careful combination of both realism and formalism to create a unique world that we still feel attached to. While the Lumiere brothers shot films with minimal sets, costumes, additional lighting, or special effects to capture life as it actually was, Chaplin uses all of those things extensively, but also in an effort to capture a realistic depiction of life in a period well known to his audience at the time. The actual content on screen, and the actions of the characters also feel realistic, even as surreal and impossible situations unfold. Every goofy and over the top scene is still grounded in the realities of this period. For example, the two prospectors find themselves starving in their cabin as they each go out to hunt with no luck. This was a very real danger of being a prospector during this time. Even as Chaplin’s Lone Prospector boils a boot and serves it to Big Jim, we still aren’t taken out of this reality. It’s certainly bizarre and silly, but it’s depicted in such a way that we almost believe it as the two cut into their meals and Chaplin twirls a shoelace around his fork like spaghetti. Another scene would be the classic sequence in which the two prospectors’ cabin is blown to the edge of a cliff by the wind. The cabin teeters on the edge of the cliff, and The Lone prospector, or Little Tramp, and Big Jim slide back and forth around the house. It was shot using a miniature cabin and special effects, but the use of parallel editing that switches between the events inside and outside of the cabin, the camera work that moves back and forth with the rocking house, and the overall realistic presentation of the world keep the audience from ever questioning whether it’s real or not. Even though it’s an obviously impossible situation, we just feel like we’re there with them. The Gold Rush exhibits verisimilitude as there is obviously immense amount of technical work that went into crafting this absurd world, but it still remains plausible and feels real to the audience, even to this day.