An exploration of the function of sound in the film The Fugitive.

Authors Avatar

Contents

Title Page: Page 2

Analysis: Pages 3-8

Conclusion: Pages 8-9

Bibliography: Page 10


Name: Liam Stott

English and Film & Media Studies Level One

Unit Title: MED 130 - The Hollywood Blockbuster

Unit Tutor: Marc O’ Day

Course Leaders: Marc O’ Day/Melanie Selfe

Assignment 2: Essay

An exploration of the function of sound in the film The Fugitive.


The majority of academic literature relating to the New Hollywood Blockbuster since the 1970s to the current day has been primarily focussed on the analysis and appraisal of the visual spectacle, complementing the merits of spectacular digital effects produced by Computer Generated Imagery. Furthermore, Alexandra Keller states that ‘we tend to expect them to be loud and noisy’ (Keller, 1999: 136), referring to the soundtrack of archetypal blockbusters such as Star Wars and The Fugitive. Keller is suggesting a ‘dismissive attitude,’ disregarding the significance of sound in the filmic experience, and thus epitomising the lack of academic attention to the study of sound in Hollywood blockbusters (Sergi-Stringer, 2003: 141).

        On the contrary, one of the predominant reasons why The Fugitive became a blockbuster was because of the heavy incorporation of innovative aural techniques. Moreover, Bruce Stambler admits that ‘we had a great visual movie,’ nevertheless in this particular feature, there was more emphasis on the ‘aural spectacle’ rather than the visual spectacle. The fact that the blockbuster went ‘over the top with sound, but tastefully’ including a diverse range of artificial sound effects, created a meaningful and cohesive audio-visual relationship, even though the incredible sound did not accurately match the visual images, which is particularly highlighted in the film’s opening sequence. The sound used at the beginning encapsulates the ‘more of it than it’s there’ type of sound that appears throughout the film, where it is sensationalised without killing it (Sergi, 2004: 125).

        During the opening titles, the first layer of the non-diegetic soundtrack is a low-toned, sombre arrangement, providing an initial dramatic and solemn atmosphere. Additionally, this first layer inflects into a high pitched synthesiser that innately acts as a typical aural corroboration to the visual sequence, which encourages the spectator to feel sorrow for Kimble’s wife who is being tragically murdered. Nevertheless, the sound editors Bruce Stambler and John Leveque contravene the generic convention of using diegetic sound to mirror the visual actions, using an additional non-diegetic layer. This second layer begins by the sound of a heavy, slamming door that is repeated three times with six echoes, resembling the noise of prison doors. This particular sound is multi-directional without a visual equivalent, creating a disturbing, threatening tone (Sergi-Stringer, 2003: 144-145).

        Furthermore, during the opening sequence, there is also a non-diegetic growl that is not too dissimilar to a grizzly bear, metaphorically producing an animalistic image of Kimble’s murderer, with a predatory quality as he visually overpowers the female. This particularly low frequency growl complies with the ‘emotional sound equation’ that equates low frequencies with a potential threat (Holman, Roles of sound: 1999). This is appropriate, as Kimble’s wife is subsequently shot. Moreover, there is also an absence of screaming from Kimble’s wife as she is savagely murdered and no sound of her body hitting the floor. Instead, the background sound is thunderous indicating a violent storm; however there is no suggestion of any rain from the visual aerial shots. Throughout the copious camera flashes, a more aggressive impression is generated, where the sound resembles a ‘muffled gunshot.’ Finally, the aural conclusion of this sequence reverts to the slamming door that was used at the beginning (Sergi-Stringer, 2003: 145).

Join now!

        The second layer of the non-diegetic soundtrack echoes Stambler’s statement that ‘we did not want to be real’ (Sergi, 2004: 125), reflecting the ambitious and inventive soundscape of diverging from verisimilitude. This is clearly evident of the exhibition of newly created sound technologies, foregrounded by the advent of digital sound in the late 1980s (Sergi-Neale and Smith, 1998: 159). Moreover, the fact that the background sound effects do not provide a diegetic support to the visual sequence breaches the THX notion that ‘we see a sound, hear a sound.’ Thus the soundtrack is departing from the audio-visual norm in film ...

This is a preview of the whole essay