The first scene shows nature at its prime, unspoilt land . The second set of images stir up lots of emotion. They make us feel the pain and the destruction that war can cause. The land represents people, and how war can change people, how it destroys lives and general morale. It shows the harsh realities that war can bring and it shows us the present instead of the past (which the first scene seems to indicate). It also shows us what life was like before the violence and corruption that the fighting has brought about.
In the second scene “mis en scène” plays an important part in helping the story develop. In the background of the scene a skeleton of the natural world is left. The rest of land has been upset and ruined by the destruction the soldiers have caused. They have inflicted there own contours on the land; the colours that are used here are very bland and detached from emotion. The soldiers are in rigid lines and the boundaries that they have created are sharp and uneven. This provides much contrast with the first scene of the easy flowing barley. The contrast between the two images causes us to question the meaning of the first scene. Was it a memory? Was it a dream?
A clever use of editing has been used in the second scene where the camera shot does a close up of the soldier’s face, then jump cuts to the robin and then jump cuts back to the soldier. On the first shot the soldier looks still and lifeless but after he has seen the robin he smiles to himself. This shows that even the simplest of things in the time of war can touch your heart. It also shows that if the robin has survived in the ruined land around him then there is hope for them all.
In conclusion, I feel that the opening sequence was designed to stir up, not just emotion, but to really make us think about the content of the film. The questions that the opening sequence poses to the audience are ones that cannot immediately be answered. They become more apparent as the film progresses. The audience is not sure of the relevance of the images that they are first shown as they appear as a sort of memory. From the historical content that we are given, I believe these images to be happy memories of the life that the soldier once had.
Achieving Closure - The use of repeated image in the final frames of
“Gladiator”
Helen Gammons 11D
When I watch a film, I like twisted endings, like those you get in many horror films. I also like endings that explain the story. When you watch horror films you may know who the killer is but you still don’t understand how they pulled off the murder until you reach the end of the film. I find those kinds of films exciting because suddenly all the pieces of the puzzle fit together. Films that leave you still asking questions generally lead to sequels where many questions are answered and the story is explained in more detail. A good example of this is The Matrix Series. Each new film introduces more story line and new twists and turns. This leaves the viewer in suspense and makes them want to see the next film in the series so that troubling issues can be resolved. Although these endings add suspense, if there is not a sequel made then these types of endings are generally unsatisfying. A good ending should make u feel that all the issues in the film have been resolved and that the story has finished, but they have to be believable and well thought through, because if a character did something that you wouldn’t normally think they would do, then the ending can become unbelievable.
A film that I have recently watched is “Intolerable cruelty” this movie, starring Catherine Zeta Jones and George Clooney, is very cunning. Throughout the film it follows the conquests made by Catherine Zeta Jones and the money she has swindled from various husbands. She plays a devious and cunning character and ends up tricking George Clooney in order to steal his money. The audience don’t realise what she has done until the concluding minutes where all the pieces of the puzzles fit, instead of putting herself in financial jeopardy like George Clooney thinks, she is in fact trying to swindle money from him. At the end of the film the clever tricky that she has used is discovered and the pieces of the film finally fit, I definitely feel like that film had closure, and in some ways is a lot similar to the film “Gladiator” that we watched.
In the opening sequence of “Gladiator” we are shown various images. At the time they don’t make sense. These images are just left in the back of our mind. The director very cleverly weaves these images into the rest of the movie so that when we see them in the final frames the images are familiar to us. In the beginning frame we are shown an arm gently flowing through a field of barley. This clip then returns about half an hour of film time later when the soldier is collapsed on a horse headed for his hometown. Whilst he is riding he sees the field of barley and hears the children’s voices (like in the opening sequence). Then he gets a premonition that his family are in danger so he races back. In this sequence there is a close up of his face, then a sudden flash of a wall which is shown in a very cold grey colour, then the scene cuts to the first clip we saw of him, when he had his hand flowing through the barley. We also hear the children laughing just like in the opening sequence. There is then a visual bridge which carries us into the next frame. The hand that had been drifting through the barely is now dragging on the ground, and we see a picture of the soldier’s head floating across the desert. These sequences of images at the time seem rather random and they raise a lot of questions in the mind of the viewer. For the movie to feel complete these questions need to be answered and these images have to be explained.
In the final scene of “Gladiator”, we get the whole story explained to us. There is a battle scene where the soldier defeats the emperor, but is also injured and dies. A number of images from the opening sequence and from the rest of the film reoccur at the end. The first image that we see is a field of barley. It is in every way the same as the first and the second time we saw it throughout the movie, although instead of the sepia colours that were first used, now, very cold grey and blue colours are used. This effect has been used so that we recognise the image. This image has been shown to us before as a kind of memory or premonition but now the image appears with blue tones. The blue tones tend to suggest the afterlife, that finally the soldier has been reunited with his family and is now where he belongs. Next comes the image of the gate that first appears when the soldier was being carried across the desert floor. This image is also painted in the blue tones. Whilst this series of images is being played, the theme tune from the beginning starts to play. This helps to give the audience a link back to the beginning of the film, using a sound bridge, so that the images that were once unfamiliar and unexplained are finally linked in a series that explains their meaning. This is very effective as it brings the whole movie together at a single point. Next a very curious image is shown to us. There is a close-up of the soldier’s head apparently floating over the stadium floor. This is curious as we know the body is still lying on the floor so the image can’t be “real”. It is strange still when thus image is painted in “real time” colours. This leads us to ask more questions. What could the floating head represent? Why has the director chosen to paint the picture in “real time” colours? In my mind I think that the floating body could possibly represent his spirit. He has finally been set free and can now join his wife and child. This however is not the first time that we have seen picture like this, previously when the soldier was making a journey into slavery he was carried across the desert floor. The camera angle on these two shots was exactly the same, but instead of the soldier making his journey into slavery he is now making a journey into the afterlife.
I think that the director has been very clever in his use of repeated images. He uses familiar images at key points in the film so that the death of the soldier is more acceptable in our minds. We find it easier to accept his death as throughout the film he has had dreams of being reunited with family in the fields of barley, so that’s where the audience feels he belongs. The repeated use of images leads us to believe that the soldier’s death is inevitable. I do feel that the movie gives us a sense of closure and so it easier to accept the overall outcome of the battle. The ending of gladiator is satisfying to an audience as all their previous unexplained questions have now been answered. Therefore I believe that the film “Gladiator” does achieve closure to give the audience a satisfied ending.
