We find out that Ceasar is used to having people who are ex-con’s working for his friend suggesting that there is usually crime involved in his business.
The audience can see a possessive side to Ceasar as he drapes his arm around Violet; we can see that she is his ‘moll’. I think that the audience’s intended reaction is to dislike Ceasar. I personally see him as patronising and pathetic. I can see Violet as then ‘femme fatale’ in this film.
The setting for this scene takes place in Violet’s flat which has expensive surroundings, again suggesting a gangster reputation. This helps to establish the genre and events to come. This is also like the surroundings in ‘Scar Face’.
It’s quite a slow moving scene without any special effects or cross cuts. The tone of this film is quite serious with an element of humour when Ceasar thinks Corky is male. I feel this scene doesn’t follow the codes of convention as although it’s a crime thriller, it has gangster, and homosexual sub-genres. The narrative is minimal compared to other films.
The second scene I have chosen is later on into the film. I have chosen this scene because it gives an example of cause and effect; it shows the intensity of Corky’s and Violet’s relationship and also introduces the audience to the motive and plan to steal the money. It follows the scene with the violent episode of Ceasar attempting to get information out of a person who has deceived them.
It takes place in two locations, a café and Corky’s car. They’re slightly more ‘seedy’ than the first of the locations; perhaps this is to place emphasis on the plan to take the money and Corky’s lower class. Corky’s car is parked in a poorly lit ally way, which is dark and sets the atmosphere.
There is more narrative in this scene, the audience gets to see the cause (Corky and Violet meeting) and effect (their plan to steal the money).
I could see more of the gangster sub-genre when Violet explains she ‘wants out’, Corky also realises how dangerous they are when she says ‘they are worse than any cop because they have lots of money and no rules.’
Because of the narrative the audience is still unsure whether to trust Violet or to think she is using Corky.
Overall the film does follow certain codes of convention, it follows a basic pattern for a film; stable situation; disruption; goals they want to achieve; threat, good/evil struggle; and a resolution where questions are answered. I feel that my two scenes show the first three of these points. These are all parts of the equilibrium which becomes disturbed and usually in most films becomes restored at the end.
In each scene there is an independent point of view in which the camera can see everything. The audience’s responses to this film are generally to feel sorry for Violet and be on the side of her and Corky. This is influenced also because the audience had been made do dislike Ceasar in my first chosen scene. I think the audience as of yet identifies with Corky the most.
I have noticed intertextuality within this film with the whole ‘money in a suitcase’ notion; it is classic of crime movies. A film made after ‘Bound’ is ‘Oceans Eleven’ which follows the same genre and atmosphere. ‘Killing Zoe’ also is a crime thriller made in 1998 which also has large proportions of violence, money involved and a hero.
I think that classic crime thrillers tend to bare only small resemblances to ‘Bound’, ‘The Italian Job’ is one of the most famous crime thrillers of its time however have little similarities even though it involves ex-cons and vast amounts of planning.
The second scene I have chosen shows elements of Propp’s functions who studied the role of characters and their functions. Where the hero is presented with a difficult task and where the hero is recognised, the hero in this scene is Corky.
Tzvetan Todorov studied the action of a narrative and the state of equilibrium, we see from my second scene that this equilibrium is about to be disturbed.
I found the associations of the gangster genre very apparent throughout my scenes because of the actors however the main genre is a crime thriller as the crime involved is the theft of the money, most gangster movies follow the relations between certain ‘families’ who are rivals and so on.
Joe Pantoliano who plays Ceasar has also been in other gagster and crime genre films such as ‘New Blood’ and ‘Bad Boys’. For much of the audience this makes him easier to relate to his part.
Much of the narrative is gripping in a tedious sense. Because of the narrative the audience can see the cause and effect logic, the genre and how the events have come about. The first scene has established how Corky and Violet have an attraction for each other, while we see Violet is also a moll. Already the audience knows both women are heading for dangerous circumstances. The surroundings and speech help to assert this.
The second scene establishes Corky’s and Violets relationship, how dangerous Caesar is and their plan to take $2 million. It does this using ‘seedy’, dark surroundings with intense narrative. The second scene also shows the effect from the first scene.
I believe these scenes to be the most effective to analyse the genre and narrative as they both have an effect throughout the film. However I have found it hard to specify the film to just one genre. I have been able to realise that this film does follow many of the classic codes of convention through writing about theorists.
The aesthetic values of this film allow the whole ‘gangster/moll’ theme to become apparent, the plan for the theft of the money I feel is the only thing that makes this film a crime thriller. This film is hard to relate to any other film as there are two sub-genres.
I feel that after the two scenes I have analysed the audiences reaction is one of suspense, and the people viewing this film are possibly more able to relate this film to those of a gangster genre through the speech and locations as well as a crime thriller.
