Think about the film's mise-en-scene. Choose one scene in the film and discuss all aspects of the mise-en-scene (costumes, set, lighting, props, framing) and its relation to the scene and the film as a whole. Discuss also the cultural context of the film(perhaps comparing to another film of this year from another geographical location), as well as insights into the intent of the filmmaker as well as copious evidence from within the frame. Use at least 2 paragraphs for your discussion.
And please post your favorite line from the film.
Bringing Up Baby was released towards the end of the Great Depression, a severe worldwide economic depression that took place mostly during the 1930s, originating in the United States. Many of the films produced during this time were comedies and drama, often used as a way to escape the real world and enjoy oneself during the crisis. As Howard Hawks was contracted by RKO Radio Pictures, he most likely had little say in the intent of the film, however as many were created to bring in audiences, that was most likely the intent of RKO and by extension Hawks as well. The main characters of the film are all wealthy and successful, unlike a majority of the population during the Great Depression, by creating a world in which even the wealthy had troubles, the people were given a light of hope in escaping poverty as well as a moment to forget about it.
ReplyDeleteThe scene I have chosen begins with the shot of the plaque in front of the museum and ends with David Huxley leaving the lab to prepare for his round of golf with Alexander Peabody. The plaque in the first shot is a dark grey color, similar to the dark color of Alice Swallow’s dress that is shown in the next shot. The skeleton of the brontosaurus is a much lighter white color, similar to that of David Huxley’s lab coat. This juxtaposition of things that would otherwise be similar in nature creates a relationship between all four items. Swallow’s dress being similar to the plaque of the museum represents how she is more concerned with the business and financial aspect of the brontosaurus as the museum would be. Huxley’s lab coat being similar in color to that of the brontosaurus skeleton highlights his relationship with the isolated project rather than worrying about the museum as a whole. The contrast between HUxley and Swallow also represents the differences between them. Their upcoming marriage which is mentioned in the scene has one major dilemma, Huxley wanting a real marriage, whereas Swallow sees it as a marriage of convenience. This contrast between the two characters is also highlighted by how out of place Swallow looks in the lab, which is generally very light colored. Huxley appears to blend in within the lab despite sitting in a precarious position as opposed to Swallow standing like a normal person person and still standing out dramatically. When David is told of the intercostal clavicle arriving, Swallow and the skeleton begin to share a similar shade, as the skeleton is now seen as a possible profit for the museum rather than work of passion for Huxley. The contrasts between Swallow and Huxley are further explored as they talk of their marriage, Swallow is covered in shadow whereas Huxley is in a direct stream of light, Swallow is once again wearing a dark color, whereas Huxley is in a bright white. The constant contrast between Huxley, Swallow, and their interests, the audience can assume that one major problem that will arise will be another woman, one who can better fit Huxley’s personality.
“The love impulse in man frequently reveals itself in terms of conflict.” (Foreshadowing at its finest)
I chose the ending scene of the film, where Miss Swallow leaves David and Susan shows up. Miss Swallow is wearing black while David is wearing a white lab coat, and these opposite colors emphasize their differences in character. When Susan shows up, she is also wearing black. This is not to say she is the same as Miss Swallow, but that she is also very different than David, as the entire film demonstrated through their frustrating interactions. Susan’s dark dress also matches well with the lighting on her face, which is meant to highlight her looks. This film came out in 1938, shortly before noir films became popular which had a lot of soft lighting on women. The set, which includes the giant prop that is the dinosaur skeleton, is comically large. The framing displays David and Susan standing on opposite sides of the skeleton on their respective ladders. This visual separation supports the aforementioned showcasing of their differences in character. The fact that they end up on one side together after the collapse of the dinosaur suggests that they can reach a sort of understanding or compromise involving the differences between the two. The framing also allows for the collapse of the dinosaur to be shown, for comedic effect because of how large it is.
ReplyDeleteBringing Up Baby is an American film, and was produced as the country was close to coming out of the Great Depression and entering the second World War. Comedy in the 1930s was meant to allow people to escape the harsh realities of the world. In screwball comedy movies, a lot is always going on and it provides a distraction for audiences from their worries. In France, another movie came out a year after Howard Hawks’ Bringing Up Baby– Jean Renoir’s The Rules of the Game. The differences in these two films released at the same time yet in different countries point out the differences in how the two different societies, and artists, dealt with the reality of an approaching war. Hawks wanted to provide an escape through comedy, while Renoir was more concerned with exploring a crumbling society.
My favorite line: “There is a leopard on your roof and it's my leopard and I have to get it and to get it I have to sing.”
The scene from Bringing Up Baby I chose is when Huxley is taking a shower and also afterwards when he can’t find his clothes. The mise-en-scène in this scene helps characterize them both individually and in regards to one another. Additionally, when considered in its social and institutional cultural contexts, the mise-en-scène enforces 1930s ideas of aggressive heteronormativity and gender roles.
ReplyDeleteFirstly Susan is wearing a robe that indicates how she is comfortable and carefree in the current situation, as opposed to Huxley who looks like he might just explode. Susan’s robe is plain and flowy; it does not give her a clear shape or figure. This shows how she is more casual and spacey and more wild as opposed to, for example, Miss Swallow, who has a much more refined wardrobe. The props also help show how she is ditzy, like when she picks up the box with the bone in it. The box is roughened up and darker than her pristine white robe, suggesting more masculinity. She has no clue what to do with it and is essentially shown to not understand it because she’s a girl and apparently girls in the 30s lack any ability to be serious about anything. Focusing back on Huxley in the bathroom after his shower: as he puts on a robe he is not shown directly, just through shadow. The shadow is distorted and illustrates a lack of order, which aligns with Huxley’s current panicking. Next he runs out and it’s revealed what is out of order: he is wearing a very frilly robe unlike Susan’s. This aspect of the mise-en-scène is the main source of comedy in this scene. It’s funny because he is wearing “girly” clothing. The heteronormative gender roles are being messed up, and that’s what constitutes a joke I guess. Next he goes out into the rest of the house and answers the door to Aunt Elizabeth. When he answers the door they are both surrounded by flowers in the frame. There are flowers on each side of the door along with flowers in the foreground. The overabundance of flowers further suggests femininity, which is basically forced upon Huxley more and more as a source of comedy.
The mise-en-scène that assertively enforces gender roles aligns with the social ideas of the era as well as the institutional regulation of Code-era Hollywood. Even though this scene seems to go against gender roles by having Huxley act effeminate, it enforces them because it shows femininity in a man as a laughable and even harmful thing that should not be wanted. In order to stop panicking, he needs to go back to being “manly.” During the Great Depression many men lost their jobs, having their masculinity directly threatened because they were no longer the breadwinners at home. This panic about losing one’s masculinity is depicted in the scene as Huxley freaks out over the robe he’s wearing. This scene shows what happens when you don’t follow gender roles, and in turn don’t align with the ever-present heteronormativity in society at the time. It brings chaos and disorder, so the film is suggesting that one should not try to go against gender roles/heteronormativity and should just stay inside the box. This scene also represents a fear of homosexuality in America and the world at the time. It contains the first ever use in film of the word “gay” to mean “homosexual.” There is clearly a connection between breaking gender roles and being gay. Huxley panics because he’s become effeminate -- he’s “gone gay.” Institutionally, the Motion Picture Production Code under which this film was made never specifically mentioned homosexuality but implied that it should not be included in films. Most laws at the time did not directly mention it because many people did not want to even think about it or recognize its existence.
This avoidance of direct mention contributes to how Bringing Up Baby handles the issue. Even today, because we have stereotypes and heteronormative ideas in our heads, we see Huxley wearing that robe and surrounded by flowers and find it funny. There is a direct mention, with the word “gay” being used, but it’s said in an outlandish way and as makes homosexuality, or implied homosexuality, the butt of the joke. In this scene, most of the comedy comes from the mise-en-scène and its social implications to the viewer, even though it can be seen as harmful implications today.
DeleteMy favorite quote: “Who are you?” “Who am I? I’m 8:10.”
In the film "Bringing up Baby"(1938), we are first introduced to Susan Vance, the main female character, when the protagonist, David, runs into her on a gold course. Many film elements come together to create the mise-en-scene in this particular scene. The setting of the scene is on a pristine, beautiful gold course on a beautiful sunny day. The characters and surroundings are brightly lit, birds are chirping and everything is tranquil. All the characters are dressed very well and formal. It all goes to convey a sense of peacefulness and order. Thus, it makes the comedy all the more humorous when Susan's character comes into the scene as she brings with her confusion and disorder. She disrupts the peace and tranquility that the film has set and thus sets the tone of absurdity and ridiculousness which continues throughout the rest of the film.
ReplyDeleteThis film was made in 1938, a period in history in which Americans looked to film to distract them from the struggle of life in the Great Depression. Thus, the goofy, screwball comedy that is portrayed in the film was very intentional, as it helped audiences escape from the harsh realities of the time. In this time period as well, women were very underrepresented in the world of film and nearly all female characters were highly stereotyped. Thus, the role of Susan, who is portrayed as a ditsy, mindless girl was a common character type for the period.
My favorite line from the film : "I'll be with you in a minute Mr. Peabody!"
The scene I am analyzing for mise en scene is the scene where Susan is being questioned by the police on whether she has an aunt or not. The uniforms the guards wear are in correspondence with each other and the setting, to set the mood that it is in a jail. The guards wear long coats and hats as a symbol of mystery and investigative. Susan and David are wearing different clothes compared to the rest of the people in the scene and are locked up in the cells to show that the guards are in control of the situation. The darkness and Susan's black outfit is a contrast to her softly lit face. Even though the room is dark, it still has a comedic under tone with how the guards and other people at the jail act around Susan and David and how they are just completely unaware of what's really going on.
ReplyDeleteThe guards are almost like kids and they are trying to figure out whats happening between there two newly captured "criminals". Although Susan and David are mostly ditsy in this film, pretty much every character acts the same way. The ditsy characteristic in this film is prevalent to characters that are around Susan and David especially.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBringing Up Baby was a comedy directed by Howard Hawks in 1938 starring Cary Grant and Katharine Hepburn. A scene that demonstrates strong mise-en-scene and is instrumental in the formation of Susan (Hepburn) and David’s (Grant) relationship. The scene of current discussion is when Susan and David are bickering while at a cocktail party until Susan tears David’s sportcoat and David rips Susan’s gown. This bonds the two for the first time and gives them a reason to leave together, in which they stay closely linked for the majority of the film. In discussing mise-en-scene, one of the notable aspects in this scene is the costume design. Because they are at a sort of formal gala, David is dressed in a standard but dapper tuxedo with long tails and tophat, while Katherine is in a stunning, shimmering dress with glittery headpiece. These costumes establish each character by showing David as a traditional and proper gentleman while contrasting Susan’s whimsical and unconventional appearance. Everyone else in the room is in dark clothing so Susan stands out even more as the true individual she is. They are in the middle of a cocktail party in this scene so everyone is sitting around tables while they are the only ones standing. Because of this arrangement, it looks like Susan and David are performing for everyone as if on a stage. They are clearly the main focus, which works to present their dynamic at full potential. Even though the scene takes place during the nighttime, the lighting is still bright suggesting the glamor of the room, as well as aiding to the effect of Susan’s dress. Susan and David are consistently in the center of the frame, showing they are the main focus in a somewhat chaotic setting.
ReplyDeleteBringing Up Baby is part of the screwball comedy genre which originated in the 1930s as a response to the Great Depression. These movies were created to distract the public of the hardships around them with light, humorous entertainment. A recurring staple of screwball comedy is by including a ditzy, wild female lead that plays the dominant role in the relationship. This perfect fits Susan’s character, tying Bringing Up Baby into the historical context of it’s time.
Now it isn't that I don't like you, Susan, because, after all, in moments of quiet, I'm strangely drawn toward you, but - well, there haven't been any quiet moments. - David
The scene I chose is the one where David, after talking to Alice and receiving the dinosaur bone, receives a phone call from Susan. The scene opens with a medium shot of David on the phone with Alice, who he is engaged to. David is wearing a grey suit, blending in with the shadows and the furniture in his room. Though he is not obscured, he does not stand out, either, mirroring his personality. His room contains an empty chair, a plant, and a carpet behind him, and a desk in front of him, covering part of his body, where the phone and a lamp sits. There is a cut to a medium close up of Alice. She is wearing a coat, and, like David, she is wearing clothes of a similar color to the environment around her, which is also grey. Also like David, there is an empty chair and a plant visible behind her, and a desk in front of her, holding a phone and a lamp. The similarity of the objects behind the two of them show that they have a lot in common, but the empty chairs also indicate that they may not be entirely present in the others’ lives. There are considerably more things on her desk, though, including a notebook and a pen, which shows that she might be more work-orientated or serious than David. Only the upper half of her body is visible, as she is sitting behind a desk, showing that her emotions may be more closed off than his (which had been shown earlier, when David wanted to take a honeymoon and she did not). She is also larger in frame than David was, signifying both the level of power she holds in their relationship and professionally. There is then a cut back to David, who is distracted by the doorbell and gets up to answer it. As he moves to the door, he is kept in the center of the frame (as he is trying to center his thoughts), and does not move from the center until he opens the door to accept his package. When he opens the door, he then moves to the right of the frame taking up a larger space than the delivery man, who stands to the left. It is here that David tells Alice that he does not want women meddling in his affairs - evidently trying to impress the delivery man by proving his power. He then signs for the package, containing the bone for their dinosaur. The package is significantly lighter than everything in frame, drawing attention to it and indicating its importance. Once the delivery man leaves, David closes the door and walks back over to the chair he was sitting in originally - as he walks back, he does not stay in the center of the frame the whole time, showing how frazzled he is by receiving the bone. His return to his initial seat also shows that he and Alice still have the same power dynamic, despite what he told her earlier. He says goodbye and hangs up. After he hangs up, there is a jump cut to a closer medium shot of David opening the package (showing that his confidence and importance immediately increase when he is not interacting with Alice). As he opens the package, the phone (which is black, in comparison to the lightness of the package) rings, and, after attempting to ignore it, David answers.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Delete
DeleteThere is a cut to a medium shot Susan, taking up about the same space in frame as David, showing that they have a more balanced dynamic than Alice and David (as shown throughout the movie). Like Alice and David, Susan is wearing a color that matches the environment around her, but unlike them, she is wearing and is surrounded by white, showing that she is not as serious as those two. She is wearing a robe, unlike the business attire of the other two. Though her robe is primarily white, does have some grey spots on it, which serves to show that she is not entirely alienated from David. There are multiple windows with frilly curtains behind her, indicating her more carefree and generally open lifestyle. She also has a plant behind her. Like the other two, she has a desk in her room that the phone and a lamp is on, but unlike the other two, the desk is to her side, not covering up any part of her body at all, showing that she is less work-orientated. Overall, her having similar items to David (the plant, the lamp, the phone), items that serve the same purpose but look completely different, shows that, though she is extremely different from David, they have some common ground without being too similar. Throughout her conversation with him, there are multiple cuts between the two of them, highlighting the visual difference between them and their rooms, and thus highlighting the difference in how they view the world. However, this also shows that they have a balanced dynamic, as they each get to contribute and be listened to - unlike David and Alice’s conversation, where Alice was only shown one time. As their conversation continues, there is a cut back to Susan where the leopard she is describing to David is finally shown. It is much darker than anything else in Susan’s room, and the dark color indicates that it is her primary link to David. Additionally, while the leopard’s fur has spots, Susan’s outfit has spots. This visual similarity between the two of them shows that Susan is, like the leopard, a chaotic force in David’s life. The fact that the leopard’s dark color ties it to the darkness of David’s room and the spots tie it to Susan also shows how the leopard will unify the two of them over the course of the film.
Overall, this scene is incredibly important in highlighting the character dynamics. We are shown how David and Alice interact in comparison to how Susan and David interact, which reinforces for the audience that David and Susan would be a better match. This scene also serves as good characterization - we do not see Alice a lot over the course of the film, so the one shot featuring her in this scene needed to do a good job of showing her all-business, no nonsense attitude in contrast to Susan’s more casual and expensive way of life.
Bringing Up Baby (dir. Howard Hawks) was released in 1938, during which time World War 2 was looming, and America was barely coming out of the Great Depression. As a result, Susan’s rich lifestyle is portrayed as idealistic, but her ditzy personality reflects the somewhat negative view the general population had towards those who managed to retain their wealth during this time. In general, though, the film does not attempt to make any grand statements regarding the economic state of America or the tension brewing in Europe, because it was not a film designed to make cultural comments. As a screwball comedy, Bringing Up Baby’s primary goal was to distract audiences from their troubles, and it did this by focusing on unrealistic misadventures. Hawks does not allow the film to dwell too long on things that do not serve comedic purpose - in general, the film is quickly but appropriately paced, allowing audiences to be immersed and charmed by the characters.
Susan: You’ve just had a bad day, that’s all!
David: That’s a masterpiece of understatement.
Bringing Up Baby is a 1938 screwball comedy directed by Howard Hawks. The movie stars Katharine Hepburn and Cary Grant, who was notoriously known for being one of the few homosexual actors of his time. This movie was released around the end of the great depression at the time most screwball comedies were being made, this was because they wanted a way to distract people from their awful lives.
ReplyDeleteThe scene I would like to look at is the party scene, when Susan and David have a very interesting encounter. Susan and David both have on really different clothes from each other, David has on a black suit with a black top hat to signify that hes kind of a normal guy and Susan has on a bright sparkly dress to show that she is out of the ordinary. Them two are always well lit which I think is more of a directorial choice to just put them in the spotlight and make them stand out
The scene that I choose to analyze from “Bringing Up Baby” (1938) is the one in which Cary Grant’s character, Dr. David Huxley is being accused of stealing someone’s purse, which is the exact same purse that Katharine Hepburn’s character, Susan Vance had. David gets mad at Susan for putting him in this situation and the scene begins. The first thing of note is the use of costumes. Susan is wearing something rather flashy, while David is wearing a tuxedo jacket with tails. David’s outfit is incredibly formal, and soon after the scene begins, Susan rips his jacket right up the middle, stating quite plainly: “Oh... you’ve torn your coat.” The costumes, it could be said, represent the personalities of Susan and David. Susan is flashy and loud, and so is her outfit. David attempts to be formal, but with Susan, everything falls apart. This is also a very pivotal scene in the film, the reason for this being that David is forced to help Susan because she later tears her dress. This only further provides evidence that the costumes are representative of their personalities. In addition, it is interesting the color and texture choice of clothing. We see in Susan’s outfit, it is bright and shiny, while David’s suit is black and matte. This of course enforces the fact that they are opposites. However, if we look back to the part of the scene in which Susan ripped David’s tuxedo jacket, we gain more insight into Susan and David’s relationship. Susan rips the jacket to reveal a white shirt underneath, white being the color that Susan is wearing. This of course supports that Susan is forcing David not only into this situation, but forcing him to become a little more like her.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of framing, the frame is never uneven. Susan and David are both in the middle, with the space in between them always the focus of the frame. If we think of this in terms of the entire film, this makes a lot of sense. The title of the film is “Bringing Up Baby”, Baby being the name of the leopard. The plot focuses on Susan and David’s search for Baby, however the framing in this scene as well as all of the other scenes makes it very obvious that the film is much more focused on the relationship between Susan and David and less about their search for the leopard.
“Bring Up Baby” was released almost a full ten years after the stock market crash. During the 1930s, there was an emphasis in media and art to keep the public happy and their hopes up. For this reason, jazz music remained popular, cartoons became commonplace, and films also had a new era. In this time period, screwball comedies arose and so did creature horror films, but obviously “Bringing Up Baby” fits into the screwball comedy category. Screwball comedies wanted to divert the public’s attention away from the current pain and suffering they are dealing with and have a little bit of a laugh.
Favorite Line: “Now it isn't that I don't like you, Susan, because, after all, in moments of quiet, I'm strangely drawn toward you, but - well, there haven't been any quiet moments.”
Bringing Up Baby is a screwball comedy film directed by Howard Hawks, which was created while the United States was suffering from The Great Depression. As a result, Bringing up Baby can be seen as a direct contrast to the society during which it was created, as its lighthearted comedic outlook aimed to better the lives of its mostly American viewers. Although one of the most famous comedy films of all time, it certainly was not the only one created during the 1930s, as filmmakers used this genre to offer an escape to those afflicted by such trying times. This is true for many other forms of media as well, with the popularity of jazz music serving as a prime example, showing that more upbeat and happy works took precedent. Furthermore, the characters within the film lead wealthy, idealistic lives, as a way to provide hope to a populus which mostly lived in squalor. While this utilization of wealthy characters has a purpose, that purpose was not to provide commentary on the political or economic status of the United States and the world around it, instead solely being used as a way to take the public's minds off their current situation.
ReplyDeleteThis cultural influence is furthered through the utilization of mise-en-scene, with the choice of costumes and framing reflecting attempting to express the wealthy and easy going lives the characters live. For instance, the scene which takes place within the formal gala is a prime example, as Susan and David both don expensive formal clothing. David wears a suit and tie, while Susan sports a shimmering dress complete with its own headpiece, each being articles of clothing not readily accessible to those living in the poverty which existed during the time period. Furthermore, these outfits speak to the personality of the characters, with the traditional suit and tie reflecting David’s conventional and uptight values, a stark contrast to Susan’s glamorous outfit. In fact, the most fitting costume piece of Susan’s is the sparkling headpiece, which is a connection to her over the top and absurd personality. The costumes of the fellow party goers also play an important role in characterizing Susan and David, as the surrounding people are seen wearing dark clothing, much more similar to that of David’s than Susan’s. As such Susan stands out in the crowd, much like she does throughout the majority of the film. The framing of the scene also plays an integral role in adding meaning to the characters, as they remain centered within the frame for the entirety of the scene, thus accentuating their importance and individuality from society.
“I've got my head. I've lost my leopard!”
The scene I have chosen is right after David begins to take a shower. The scene begins with David beginning to take a shower. Susan sneaks in wearing a flamboyant white robe that makes her stand out and juxtaposes David’s state of nature. As she runs out the room, Susan puts on David’s hat, which represents how connected she feels with him, as if he is an part of her. Susan purposefully has the maid send the clothes in to town to be pressed instead of having the maid do it herself in order to keep David near her. Susan returns to the bedroom where she finds the dinosaur bone. David is seen peeking through the door telling Susan to put it back, him being framed tightly within the door, Susan’s door, which represents how trapped he feels by Susan and out of control of what happens around him while in the company of Susan. After being told that his clothes are in town being pressed, David dawns one of Susan’s flamboyant white robes, which parallels Susan wearing David’s hat in the beginning. No matter what David does, he will always be trapped by Susan, even her clothes, which is what him wearing the robe represents. David confronts Susan about the matter of his clothes missing, but doesn’t follow through with his warning to enter the bathroom that Susan is showering in. This reinforces his character’s good nature that is shown throughout the film.
ReplyDeleteThe scene continues as David goes to look for the gardener’s clothes, when he comes upon Susan’s mother who asks why he is dressed so ridiculously. This promptly results in my favorite line of the movie by David when asked why he’s dressed the way he is, “Because I just turned gay all of the sudden!”. David increasingly becomes more agitated with the situation as Susan’s dog is barking at him and Susan frantically tries to explain to her mother who David is. David finally takes action and demands that he receives some clothes that aren’t Susan’s. David is taking control of the situation for the very first time of the movie, which is an important moment for the arc David goes through. Bringing Up Baby was released at the end of the Great Depression Era, and while the rich are betrayed as bumbling idiots, no major statements about the condition of the rich or the United States are made. Rather, the film serves the purpose to entertain and distract people from the hardships of the Great Depression.
In the scene in which David attempted to trap the wild leopard in a jail cell, most of the main characters were imprisoned in jail cells of their own. The lighting of the shots was dark and drab, as this was the tensest and most concerning event of the film.As everyone had already seemed to be in the worst possible position, the addition of a blood-thirsty leopard only rose tensions more.
ReplyDelete“Bringing Up Baby” took place in the United States during the 1950’s, unlike “Rififi”, which took place in France. Relatively modern technologies such as radios and automobiles were available to the characters in both films, and not many significant cultural differences were notable between the films.The filmmaker behind “Bringing Up Baby” seemed to simply want to create a comedic film with serious undertones, as David’s career appeared to be on the line.
My personal favorite quote from the film was “Just a minute, Mr. Peabody!”