asd

1. How has Cinematography changed through the years?
Cinematography by definition is “the art and methods of film photography” (Cambridge
Dictionary, 2020), which is a very broad and loose definition and doesn't come close to
explaining the crucial role that a cinematographer has on the finished cut of a film. While in its
basic form, cinematography can add another layer to film and create more depth to the
characters and location like in Martin Scorsese’s Taxi Driver (1976). On the other hand,
cinematography can also flip the whole plot of a film and add re-watch-ability due to hidden
features and interactions. This is highly noticeable in Martin Scorsese’s Shutter Island (2010)
which when analysed closely, reveals the films plot twist very early on in with certain encounters
between different characters. While keeping these two contrasting ways of using
Cinematography in mind, I will be analyzing how Cinematography has fluctuated throughout
cinema history and how technology has changed the job of a cinematographer. I will do this by
looking at both old and new pieces of cinema, and comparing the forms of cinematography that
are used, seeing how they differ and comparing their advantages and disadvantages. Doing
these observations will give me a deeper look into what cinematography brings to a film, and
how crucial it is to help immerse the viewer in the film as I will understand the purpose of
different techniques and how to implement them while also possibly seeing less effective
methods of implementing cinematography and mistakes made by previous cinematographers.
One feature of a well-crafted film that is often overlooked, is the editing of the clips used.
This makes sequences feel smoother and gives the director more freedom to convey the
messages they wish to. The use of well edited and perfectly timed scenes can give the viewer
all the information needed to immerse them inside the characters scenario/setting owing to the
ability to use many different shot types and movements because of the budget of modern day
cinema, they have the ability to reshoot scenes easier and have more advanced editing
equipment meaning that each individual shot can be trimmed down to only a few seconds. This
allows the studio to create the perfect sequence of shots and use it to communicate their
chosen message to the viewer. Caused by the lack of cameras and a far smaller budget in the
1930’s thanks to the public having a much smaller interest in cinema, shots had to be far longer
and feature more characters which led to less intimate moments with each character and less
character development. On average, English language films had an average shot length of 12
seconds in 1930 while in 2014 an average shot length was 2.5 seconds, which used a sample
of over 15,000 movies that were made between 1910 and 2010 (Cutting, J. E, 2012). On
average, Cutting (2012) found that older films on average had 1,132 shots per film, while
modern films like King Kong (2005) had a shot count of 3,099 which even for its 187 minute film
time is far more than the lower quartile of films. There was a common hypothesis that the
popular Television channel MTV, started in 1981, actually caused the declining shot lengths.
Cutting didn’t agree as a result of there being a steady decline before the release of MTV and
they kept with the same rate of decline after the release. Attributable to there being no definitive
answer, Cutting had multiple ideas of what caused the sharp decrease in shot length but said
that that amount of characters in each shot was larger in older films which means that the
viewer had more to look at, thus needing more shot time. When looking at the statistics and the
sharp changes made to how the film is structured, it’s easy to see just how far cinema has come

2. to understanding its viewers needs compared to older cinema. It also shows the overall
efficiency of newer films and how they use the run time to their advantage meaning they can
create deeper and more fluctuant character arcs.
When comparing older films and more modern films and especially when looking at
advancements in the use of cinematography, my previous example of King Kong (2005) shows
this better than any other film ascribed to it having a counterpart film that was created in 1933
which allows a deeper and more accurate contrast to be shown. Even With the cinema industry
finding its footing in the 1930’s such as Frankenstein (1931) and Hells Angels (1930), films
struggled to make much money by reason of the highly inefficient creation of the film and the
technology used. Hells Angels for example which was one the highest grossing films of its era
and earned $2.5 million but was still less than the $2.8 million needed for the production cost of
the fil. With less profit being made, less budget was given and this partnered with the lack of
useful technology meant that filmmakers had to cut corners and use the techniques available to
them. When comparing King Kong 1933 to 2005, the difference is stark and this is put down to
the efficiency of CGI and green screening. This means that the creation of sets and props
wasn’t needed, while in King Kong (1933), all sets and props had to be made by hand. For
example, in King Kong (2005), the scene where King Kong is holding Ann Darrow used a green
hand to hold her with a green screen backdrop. This allowed the director Peter Jackson to use
Computer generated imagery to create the illusion of King Kong holding the actress. On the
other hand, King Kong (1993) had a difficult task with creating effects that were deemed realistic
even for the 1930’s as special effects were rather inefficient and costly (Bartleby Research,
2020). Comparing scenes of King Kong 2005 to 1933, they had to be adjusted to suit the limits
of their practical effects, such as only having Kong’s arm in scene as the rest of the body isn’t
made to the same scale as the arms. Despite this, the use of several different techniques for the
scenery such as glass paintings and map paintings made the illusion of depth within the island
and several different sized puppets/ animatronics of Kong were made to change the scale him
from scene to scene.
Emotion and tone can be shown in many different ways, but none are as atmospheric or
narrative deepening as Colour. Although it can be used to show a glimpse into a characters
mind, colour can also be used to simplify a story down to just raw emotions. Despite the
misconception that black and white films have no colour, the different shades within said black
and white films can be important also. For example, Georges Méliès‘s film A Trip to the Moon
(1902) used certain shades of greys and blacks to show depth within the film to add scale and a
sense of environment. Despite this, the first ever film to have colour within it was With Our King
and Queen Through India (1912) and was almost 20 year earlier than most mainstream films
decided to use colour such as The Wizard of Oz (1920) and Gone With the Wind (1939). The
Wizard of Oz had a wide colour palette through the film and used deep contrast to portray a
change in scenery. An example of this is the faded brown filter turning Kansas into a dire
wasteland which is quickly overrun by the technicolour world of Oz that has deep rich colours.
Despite these colours, they didn’t serve much purpose other than to contrast and show off the
new technology concerning colour.

3. When comparing this to recent films such as Todd Philips’ Joker (2019), it’s easy to see
how the understanding of colour and lighting and the effects it has on the viewer and film. A
great example of this is the comedy club scene which has red lamps which create an almost
dangerous and intimidating environment, but also block out the audiences faces so the focus is
on Arthur’s struggle which is only made worse by the spotlight which can be interpreted as an
interrogation light. With each aspect of the scene being thought out to create one common goal,
the scene ends up adding great character development just by the use of colour and lighting.
When looking back at all my evidence, it’s easy to see that cinematography has in fact change
massively. But what is more important, is why it has changed. I believe that the increasing
knowledge of cinema is in fact the most important aspect in its growth in view of the ability to
understand more complicated techniques and the effects they have on the film. I have decided
this as many issues with older generation films are based on the use of techniques and a lack of
knowledge.

4. Bibliography
Bartleby Research. (2020). Technological Evolution in the Film Industry Essay. [Internet] Available at:
https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Technological-Evolution-in-the-Film-Industry-PKCLTTUSVJ. [Accessed
17/12/2019]
Cambridge Dictionary. (2020). Meaning of Cinematography in English. [Internet] Available at:
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/cinematography. [Accessed 03/12/19]
Cutting, J. E. (2012) A Window on Reality: Perceiving Edited Moving Images. Current Directions in
Psychological Science. Sage, USA.
Fleming, V. (1939) Gone With the Wind. Loew’s Inc. USA.
Hughes, H. (1930). Hells Angels. United Artists. USA.
Jackson, P. (2005) King Kong. Universal Studios. USA.
May, K. (2017). How colour helps a movie tell its story. [Internet] Available at:
https://ideas.ted.com/how-color-helps-a-movie-tell-its-story/. [Accessed 07/01/20]
Méliès, G. (1902) A Trip to the Moon. Star Film Company. France.
Miller, G. (2014). Data from a century of cinema. [Internet] Available at:
https://www.wired.com/2014/09/cinema-is-evolving/. [Accessed 17/12/2019]
One Hundred Years of Cinema. (2017). 1933: King Kong - How Early Special Effects Created the 8th
Wonder of the World. [Internet] Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4ViuqIdsJg.
[Accessed 07/01/20]
Philips, T. (2019) Joker. Warner Bros. Pictures. USA.
Scorsese, M. (1976). Taxi Driver. Columbia Pictures. USA.
Scorsese, M. (2010) Shutter Island. Paramount Pictures. USA.
Semen, L. (1920) The Wizard of OZ. Chadwick Pictures. USA.
Urban, C. (1912) With Our King and Queen through India. Natural Color Kinematograph Company.
London, UK.
Whale, J. Frankenstein (1931) Universal Pictures. USA.

5. Wilkinson, A. (2018). How Georges Méliès’ films are still influencing cinema, more than 100 years
later. [Internet] Available at: https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/5/3/17311222/georges-melies-google-
doodle-trip-moon-conquest-pole-effects. [Accessed 07/01/20]