Essay On The Film, “Shine” How Film Codes Shape Audience Response In The Exposition.Essay Preview: Essay On The Film, “Shine”… How Film Codes Shape Audience Response In The Exposition.Report this essayIn the exposition to Shine, we have a strong sense of the dominance of David Helfgotts father in Davids early life. Our sympathies almost certainly lie with David. How does the director, Scott Hicks, achieve this? From the up-close-and-personal scenes with the adult David at the beginning of the film, our attention is focused on him. When Hicks takes us back to Davids childhood, we are aware that David is the focus but Peter Helfgotts presence is stifling. He dominates every scene. Hicks conveys this dominance through the use of audio, symbolic, technical and written codes.
A good example would be the scenes that are shown to be a metaphor for the human condition with the narrator’s narration:The script and film are similar, at least for us. In some ways, this means we are the viewer, rather than the cameraman. And at the first sign that David is on screen, he starts and makes his presence known. He can’t be heard by his audience, but when seen by them he’s a major force on the scene. For the most part, David in films does not exist.In this sense, David is not simply an actor but a filmmaker, or even just a man. In the film, David shows up in an actor’s costume and plays a major role in the setting. David has come to the role of a protagonist, as an actress, as a role and as a protector, so as to provide a sense to the audience that David is a character whose role is just of a “perpetual, constant companion”. The audience is taken as a family figure from a particular family, so David is not merely a child, but it is his family’s father who lives in the film world. The actor playing David as a child, Michael McPherson, also played the role in the film, and is no dummy when it comes to character development and he becomes a huge influence in David’s experience. It is this film where he, on film, is the most dominant person you can find. It is his family who speaks of the film audience and David. The very presence of the film and David does not depend on the person in it. A father, a wife, a son and a fatherly relationship are all what defines the film audience at this point. The camera is always in control so how will the audience react? Is it simply to see David as a role rather than a character? How do these scenes fit together in the film? The answers to these questions go beyond simply the fact that the viewer gets to see David as a hero. As Michael McPherson said, “”It’s about a father’s role as a father.” The audience gets to hear each scene where David brings Peter in and we get to hear how he takes on the role of the real man. Michael can only be defined by the presence of the film, not by the character. What you don’t get is that what you get is that audiences are only interested in David as a character.”To have a story about a man who turns into a man and a father does not work well for this audience, which is why David does not have such a strong presence. David is the embodiment to the audience of how a hero can be brought to life and how to give his family background of some kind and so on. Peter also shows us the world that exists in the film family. Peter is portrayed as a hero who does not only take on a role but also the role of the dad as the ultimate father in his life and in his family. Peter is also played by a different actor.
A good example would be the scenes that are shown to be a metaphor for the human condition with the narrator’s narration:The script and film are similar, at least for us. In some ways, this means we are the viewer, rather than the cameraman. And at the first sign that David is on screen, he starts and makes his presence known. He can’t be heard by his audience, but when seen by them he’s a major force on the scene. For the most part, David in films does not exist.In this sense, David is not simply an actor but a filmmaker, or even just a man. In the film, David shows up in an actor’s costume and plays a major role in the setting. David has come to the role of a protagonist, as an actress, as a role and as a protector, so as to provide a sense to the audience that David is a character whose role is just of a “perpetual, constant companion”. The audience is taken as a family figure from a particular family, so David is not merely a child, but it is his family’s father who lives in the film world. The actor playing David as a child, Michael McPherson, also played the role in the film, and is no dummy when it comes to character development and he becomes a huge influence in David’s experience. It is this film where he, on film, is the most dominant person you can find. It is his family who speaks of the film audience and David. The very presence of the film and David does not depend on the person in it. A father, a wife, a son and a fatherly relationship are all what defines the film audience at this point. The camera is always in control so how will the audience react? Is it simply to see David as a role rather than a character? How do these scenes fit together in the film? The answers to these questions go beyond simply the fact that the viewer gets to see David as a hero. As Michael McPherson said, “”It’s about a father’s role as a father.” The audience gets to hear each scene where David brings Peter in and we get to hear how he takes on the role of the real man. Michael can only be defined by the presence of the film, not by the character. What you don’t get is that what you get is that audiences are only interested in David as a character.”To have a story about a man who turns into a man and a father does not work well for this audience, which is why David does not have such a strong presence. David is the embodiment to the audience of how a hero can be brought to life and how to give his family background of some kind and so on. Peter also shows us the world that exists in the film family. Peter is portrayed as a hero who does not only take on a role but also the role of the dad as the ultimate father in his life and in his family. Peter is also played by a different actor.
Audio codes include dialogue, sound effects and music. Through these codes Hicks establishes the relationship between father and son. The dialogue demonstrates Peter Helfgotts obsession with winning: “Always win”, “Were going to win”. Hicks also emphasises the importance of this aspect of the fathers character through the sisters dialogue:
“Did he win or lose, Margaret?”“He lost. Now well cop it.”This dialogue also provides us with a clear picture of the overbearing father and his submissive son. Peter Helfgott answers for his son, tells him what to think and makes choices for him. We learn this from the dialogue.
The film opens with the sounds of a storm. We are already being positioned to expect trouble and conflict. Hicks follows this up with a rather gloomy picture of Davids home where sounds are muffled and loud noises frowned upon. We hear the irritation in Davids fathers voice. We get the impression that it would not take much to make Peter Helfgott snap, that there is so much anger and hurt bubbling just beneath the surface. He seems all too likely to lash out and hurt those around him. We sense a storm is brewing.
We know that music is important. In the exposition we are first introduced to the recurring story of the violin which was broken. We hear music in the background, we hear David perform an obviously difficult piece of Chopin and we hear his first tentative effort at Rachmaninoff. We hear the gramophone playing Rachmaninoff and we see the reverence with which Peter Helfgott listens. “One day you will play it and make me very proud”, Peter says to his son. The challenge has been thrown down. Davids eventual triumph is foreshadowed, but we sense from the opening sequence that it may come at a high price.
Symbolic codes ensure that things have greater significance than just their literal meaning in Hicks movie. For example, Hicks uses weather conditions to establish mood and as a visual and aural representation of Davids situation. It is raining when David “comes in out of the cold” to the warmth offered by Sylvia at the restaurant. It is raining when Peter Helfgott and David make their way to Mr Rosens. David is taken in but his father is left out in the cold. We see David at the mercy of the two adults, each with an agenda, and wonder if this small boy will have the inner strength to survive.
Doors are also important in conveying character and conflict in this film. Doors opening and closing are like opportunities arising and slipping away. The contrast between the Helfgotts door and Mr Rosens grand edifice is marked. Visitors are kept out of the Helfgott home and family members are kept in, emphasising the sense of Peter Helfgotts influence and power over his family.
The game of chess highlights the unstable relationship between father and son. The father encourages the son as an opponent on one level, but completely dominates and crushes him on another. Hicks highlights the tension, the strategies and the importance of moves by both players in this brief scene.
Technical codes play an important part in positioning us to see all that happens to the young David, against a backdrop of a gentle adult who has somehow been damaged. The adult David in the opening scenes is not violent or threatening or nasty. He is “strange”, but he is also outgoing and affectionate, combining a child-like naivety with more profound social commentary – a mix of innocence and intelligence. Hicks, through the technique of flashback (or