American cinematographer (Jan-Dec 1941)

PICTORIAL, as well as dramatic, coordination between background action and foreground action is a seldom-discussed phase of picture-making one of those "elementary" details we too generally take for granted. Yet it is of highly practical importance to both cinematographer and director, for it can make or mar a scene, both photographically and dramatically. And while it partakes of both direction and cinematography, neither can afford to dismiss the matter as wholly a part of the other's responsibilities. Thorough-going and plain-spoken cooperation is needed. The director can deal with the strictly dramatic effects of what happens in the background, but he cannot always evaluate it in terms of its effects on photographic composition. Similarly, the cinematographer can deal with it as a phase of composition, but he cannot always consider it solely from this viewpoint alone. For the completely coherent result both are seeking, the two should work as closely together in caring for this detail as they naturally do in dealing with the broader aspects of their work. It might easily be expected that pictorially intrusive background action might be more of a perplexing problem in the so-called larger scenes, in which sizeable crowds and mobs of people take part. Actually, I think the reverse is true. In making mob scenes and the like, everyone — the director and his staff, the cinematographer and his staff — are thoroughly conscious of the background and its action. They all watch closely to see to it that no small, unexpected movement (or lack of it!) in the background affects the perfection of the scene as a whole. But in smaller scenes — those employing only a few extra players in the background — most of us are likely to be a bit off guard, concentrating more on the direction, action and lighting of the principals in the foreground. Then is when some of the most disturbing background errors creep in. Perhaps the commonest faults of this nature is calling for action in the background, and not specifying what kind of action is needed to coordinate pictorially with your foreground action. Action of the wrong type or tempo can divert audience attention from any but the fastest-moving foreground action with amazing persistence. For example, in one recent picture the leading man is shown singing a song in the music-department of a big store. Naturally, showing this in a two-shot angle, there should be some action in the background to produce a natural effect. But in this particular case, the dominant background action, repeated in several cuts, included a girl shopper descending a flight of stairs in the background. Every time that girl walked down those stairs the audience's eye was forcibly jerked from the singer to this dramatically unimportant extra! What happened was that those con Director Frank Lloyd (right) and Director of Photography Milton Krasner, A.S.C., discuss a scene for "This Woman Is Mine." Action In The Background! By FRANK LLOYD As told to Wm. Stull, A.S.C. cerned in making the scene either forgot or overlooked the fact that the singer, even though nearer the camera and in better focus, was necessarily practically motionless, and so a visually passive element, while the sharply contrasting diagonal movement of the girl in the background was, compositionally speaking, a much more dominant element of the composition. In addition, this particular movement, beginning at the upper left-hand corner of the frame, was also more forceful compositionally, from its mere positioning. The same girl, quietly examining merchandise on an equally distant counter, or slowly moving about the store, would have been fully as natural for background innposes — and not visually intrusive. In the same way, suppose we have a scene laid in a de luxe cafe. In reality, in such a cafe at a busy hour the waiters are likely to be rushing very briskly back and forth with their trays. But on the screen, if we had those waiters moving at anything like the pace they would use in the real cafe, their swift movement would almost certainly "steal" the scene from our principals seated at a table in the foreground! To be cinematically effective, the action of waiters and "extra" diners alike would have to underplay reality in order to convey an impression of reality. Incidentally, a smart cafe is a fine place for a director or cinematographer to learn about grouping. Go into any first-class cafe — especially during a moderately slack hour — and notice how skillfully the Maitre d'hotel has scattered the patrons about the room. If he knows his business, there will be no grouping of guests in one place, with an ocean of empty tables elsewhere! Instead, he will see to it that there is a table or so in use in almost every part of the room, so that the incoming customer gets an impression of a well-patronized eating-place, even though com(Continued on Page 396) American Cinf.matockai'ukk August, Hill 369