Thriller Short Film Analysis 3

Interpretation

In my third and final analysis I have found my favourite thriller short film so far. I had considered analysing Echoes, a psychological thriller, but upon watching Interpretation I found it's quality too difficult to ignore. It has won awards at 24 film festivals for best narrative, and so it is both a professional and critically acclaimed piece of work. 

The short film starts with a couple out on a date. They have just been to watch a movie at the cinema, and are discussing it as they walk home in a vibrant city. The narrative changes to follow a trio of thugs walking in the same city. They too are having a discussion, talking about the philosophies of conflict. Both the couple and the thugs cross paths on a back street, where the thugs decide to rob them after reading the passage 'attack promptly where the enemy is most vulnerable' from their book. No one is around, so the thugs demand money from both the man and the woman. Once they have emptied their wallet and purse, the thugs talk about ushering them into a nearby apartment, with the implication of raping the woman. The boyfriend resists their demands, and a gritty brawl ensues. The man displays good fighting skills as he manages to immobilise all three thugs and emerge victorious. As he starts to pick up the money from the floor, he sees the book that the thugs were reading from: The Art of War. He recites a quote himself, revealing that he has read it. Making sure his partner is okay, the couple continue to walk away, leaving the thugs unconscious on the street. 

Dialogue

Dialogue is very key to this short film, which is the first I have analysed to place such an importance on speaking characters. Although the plot is basic and easy to interpret, the dialogue adds a level of complexity that complements the title 'Interpretation' and conveys a message to the audience, albeit an ambiguous one. The dialogue is not intended to give clarity, but to open the viewer's mind to the words being said. For example as the thugs state 'attack promptly where the enemy is most vulnerable' it can be interpreted from the perspective of both the protagonist and antagonists. Although the back street could be seen as the place where the couple is most vulnerable, it also turns out to be the place where the thugs are most vulnerable. Therefore throughout Interpretation dialogue is intended to provide philosophical arguments, as well as establish a sense of character. The couple are presented as comfortable in each other's company, while the thugs are depicted as naive in their attempts to study military tactics. 

Camera Shots/Angles

• Tracking Shot: The tracking movements used here foreshadow the conflict and set up the meeting of the characters. When the camera tracks the couple, they are walking in the right direction, whereas when the camera tracks the thugs, they are walking in the left direction. Therefore even though we are following two separate arcs, the viewer is aware that the characters are going to collide. It frames them in a way that makes their interaction an inevitable coincidence. 
• Two Shot: Simply put, the two shots frame the two characters as a couple. Their is a sense of unity to their movements and this evokes the sense of companionship that later motivates the man to intervene against the thugs. 
• Over the Shoulder Shot: Again, over the shoulder shots are used between the couple to distinguish their solidarity and make their interaction seem realistic. In contrast it is also used to establish a scene of tension when the thugs confront the couple. The over the shoulder shot frames the conflict with a claustrophobic intimacy that builds suspense and anticipation. 
• Mid Shot: Throughout the fight sequence, mid shots enable the viewer to accurately trace the action whilst also being given a gritty view of it from a nearby position. This way the audience is not detached from the action but they're also not too close to have the action obscured. 
• Close Up: Close ups have a pretty universal focus; to bring the viewer's attention to a certain facial expression. A number of emotional responses are demonstrated in this short film; amusement, happiness, uncertainty, apprehension, and as a result the close ups capture the arc of these changing emotions, particularly in the male protagonist. 
• Extreme Close Up: An extreme close up has even more specificity than a close up, but focuses on something with distinct relevance, which doesn't necessarily mean a facial expression. When we see a shot of the cash on the floor or a shot of the book, this is an example of an extreme close up. The book in particular is a symbolic shot that captures the deeper complexity of the film. 
• Long Shot: Notably the film ends with a long shot, showing the couple walk out of the frame and then lingering on the three unconscious thugs before fading to the credits. A long shot is a common way to conclude a piece of cinema because it resembles how we are departing from the action. The camera is physically detaching us from the action to imply the events are finished. 

I'd like to note that the camera shots here are static leading up to the confrontation, but when the couple are approached by the thugs the camera starts to adopt a shaky cam motion to physically resemble the uneasiness of the exchange. I think this is a brilliant way to show the transition from equilibrium to disequilibrium through practical ways as well as through narrative. 

Editing

At the beginning of the film, while the credits are rolling, we here the background noise of a street and so this prepares the viewer for the setting. This is an example of a J Cut, where the sound precedes the visuals in order to allow viewers to be introduced to the forthcoming setting without seeing it straightaway. 
Also towards the start of the film, parallel editing is implemented to juxtapose the two alternating storylines before they converge. This immediately builds suspense because the viewer is anticipating the circumstances under which these contrasting partnerships will meet. Despite not being fast cutting, the dynamic nature of the shots adds a quicker pace to the scene, so although everything seems normal, the viewer is on edge. As the fight is initiated, fast cutting is used to highlight the spontaneity and quick reactions of the characters. This creates a scene of intensity as the camera frequently uses match cuts to offer new perspectives while following the continuous nature of the brawl. During the brief shot where the protagonist is smashed with a bottle, the editor uses slow-motion to capture the pause as he is thrown off balance, which acts as both an interval to the action as well as to show that the protagonist is only human after all. 

Diegetic/ Non-Diegetic Sound

The diegetic sounds of the busy street and traffic help to depict a busy atmosphere, which is later used to greater effect in the back alley where there are no background noises, creating a contrasting atmosphere of isolation rather than inclusion. Also the typical diegetic noises of dialogue, punches and smashes are evident, but I think that the punching sounds are far less expressive than some action films, and this complements the gritty realism being attempted here. 
In terms of the non-diegetic score, it only starts as the two groups come into contact with each other. Consequently it is possible to infer that the soundtrack is a method of suspense and unease in this film, another indication of the disequilibrium occurring. That being said the score is very unobtrusive, it is never overwhelming or blaring in a way that transcends the realism of the film, it simply complements the tension. And at the end the score adopts a cathartic change in tone to highlight the victory and return to normality, once again acting as an emotional indicator accompanying the narrative arc. 

Mise-en-Scene

Without doubt the mise-en-scene is mostly symbolic in the form of the book 'The Art of War'. Not only is it used to portray the thugs as thoughtful and engaged, subverting stereotypical expectations of thugs, but it also represents the film's central exploration. The shared connection between the thugs and the protagonist is through the book's meaning, both of whom interpret it differently. While the fashion choices aren't quite so deliberately opposing, the protagonist's glasses could be seen as a way of lowering audience's expectations. Glasses aren't really associated with an environment of violence and crime, so the fact that the protagonist wears them means that the viewer is not expecting him to be as physically able as he turns out to be. Furthermore, once his lenses have been punched off of his face, this could represent his transition from normal man into focused warrior. 
In terms of setting, the vibrancy of the city streets at the start juxtaposes the drab and sombre setting of the back streets. The lack of lighting alerts the audience that this place is not particularly pleasant but more importantly not very busy. 

Review

I have to say I love this short film. It combines everything I have enjoyed over the last couple of weeks. Not only does it dedicate time to establish the protagonists, but it also develops the antagonists and even establishes a common ground between them in the form of the book. In addition I think that the action is very well choreographed and executed, and I love the depth of the philosophy that elevates such a simple narrative from a basic thriller into a complex story. The relationship between the antagonist and protagonist, although oppositional, is still somewhat understood as an acceptance, based on the interpretation of the book. 

Having examined 8 short films and viewed many more, I can honestly confess that my two favourites are:

• Passing
• Interpretation

They will be the benchmark from which I can now start to develop my own short film, as this extensive exercise has given me the understanding I need to advance into the planning stages.