Sunday, October 14, 2007

The Omnipresent Invisible Style

So I set myself to finding an example of the Dominant Hollywood "Invisible" Style that we learned about last week... and realized that it's hard NOT to find it. These conventions, that were established decades ago, are everywhere. Commercials, music videos, reality TV... It's weird how even in so-called "reality" shows, the editors use shot/reverse shot editing to create a conversation where there may or may not have been one. I tried to find an example of this on YouTube, and wound up going down a rabbit hole of America's Next Top Model and Top Chef clips that nearly swallowed me for all eternity... and I still didn't find a really great example (or, more specifically, a really great example that wasn't somehow degrading, insulting, or otherwise irritating). Anyway, here is a pretty tame example from Scrubs - a show that is often pretty creatively shot, with a lot of carefully choreographed camerawork, traveling monologues, etc.

The beginning of the clip is slightly less conventional, but the end moves right into the shot/reverse shot "invisible" style we talked about last week.

So, Reel Grrls: I was wondering. Have you tried to emulate the invisible style in your work in the past? If so, were you aware you were doing it? Have there been times that you have broken Dominant Hollywood style "rules" in your work? If so, do you think it worked in the end, or did it look amateurish? And finally, in future work would you like to try to master this style, or are you more interested in countering it - taking inspiration from Godard, perhaps?

This isn't a quiz, I'm just interested in what you're thinking.

Oh, and Kubo, safe travels to Texas! See you there! Try to post us an update if you have a moment.

No comments: