The Truman Show – The Halloween Edition

I was asked about lighting and here are some ideas from BFI.


The Truman Show combines personal drama with an incisive critique of contemporary media. Peter Weir frequently stages action and composes shots so that the real world is imbued with a fantastical and certainly uneasy sense of the overly perfect. The lighting for much of the film is high key, which means the images have a flat, bright quality. It appears almost too perfect and artificial, which as we discover is exactly the situation – the world that Truman inhabits is a television studio set. For those scenes where Truman finds himself challenged by his environment and therefore compelled to question it, the lighting changes. Several key sequences, when issues are raised that Truman has to deal with, occur at night. The film uses a barrelling effect to suggest we are watching some of the action through a hidden camera, for example when Truman goes to cross the water. A barrelling effect is achieved when a wide-angle lens is attached to the camera and the rim of the lens is just about visible at the edge of the frame.

“Indifference…is more dangerous than anger and hatred.” Elie Wiesel

Elie Wiesel has has said that he “speaks out on behalf of Holocaust victims because he feels it is the right thing to do so that young people can work toward a more humane world-a world in which compassion for those from cultures other than their own is a major priority.”

In 1999, Wiesel gave a speech entitled, “The Perils of Indifference.” Here is an excerpt:

We are on the threshold of a new century, a new millennium. What will the legacy of this vanishing century be? How will it be remembered in the new millennium? Surely it will be judged, and judged severely, in both moral and metaphysical terms. These failures have cast a dark shadow over humanity: two World Wars, countless civil wars, the senseless chain of assassinations – Gandhi, the Kennedys, Martin Luther King, Sadat, Rabin – bloodbaths in Cambodia and Nigeria, India and Pakistan, Ireland and Rwanda, Eritrea and Ethiopia, Sarajevo and Kosovo; the inhumanity in the gulag and the tragedy of Hiroshima. And, on a different level, of course, Auschwitz and Treblinka. So much violence, so much indifference.What is indifference? Etymologically, the word means “no difference.” A strange and unnatural state in which the lines blur between light and darkness, dusk and dawn, crime and punishment, cruelty and compassion, good and evil.

What are its courses and inescapable consequences? Is it a philosophy? Is there a philosophy of indifference conceivable? Can one possibly view indifference as a virtue? Is it necessary at times to practice it simply to keep one’s sanity, live normally, enjoy a fine meal and a glass of wine, as the world around us experiences harrowing upheavals?

Of course, indifference can be tempting – more than that, seductive. It is so much easier to look away from victims. It is so much easier to avoid such rude interruptions to our work, our dreams, our hopes. It is, after all, awkward, troublesome, to be involved in another person’s pain and despair. Yet, for the person who is indifferent, his or her neighbour are of no consequence. And, therefore, their lives are meaningless. Their hidden or even visible anguish is of no interest. Indifference reduces the other to an abstraction.

Over there, behind the black gates of Auschwitz, the most tragic of all prisoners were the “Muselmanner,” as they were called. Wrapped in their torn blankets, they would sit or lie on the ground, staring vacantly into space, unaware of who or where they were, strangers to their surroundings. They no longer felt pain, hunger, thirst. They feared nothing. They felt nothing. They were dead and did not know it.

Rooted in our tradition, some of us felt that to be abandoned by humanity then was not the ultimate. We felt that to be abandoned by God was worse than to be punished by Him. Better an unjust God than an indifferent one. For us to be ignored by God was a harsher punishment than to be a victim of His anger. Man can live far from God – not outside God. God is wherever we are. Even in suffering? Even in suffering.

In a way, to be indifferent to that suffering is what makes the human being inhuman. Indifference, after all, is more dangerous than anger and hatred. Anger can at times be creative. One writes a great poem, a great symphony, one does something special for the sake of humanity because one is angry at the injustice that one witnesses. But indifference is never creative. Even hatred at times may elicit a response. You fight it. You denounce it. You disarm it. Indifference elicits no response. Indifference is not a response.

Indifference is not a beginning, it is an end. And, therefore, indifference is always the friend of the enemy, for it benefits the aggressor – never his victim, whose pain is magnified when he or she feels forgotten. The political prisoner in his cell, the hungry children, the homeless refugees — not to respond to their plight, not to relieve their solitude by offering them a spark of hope is to exile them from human memory. And in denying their humanity we betray our own.

Indifference, then, is not only a sin, it is a punishment. And this is one of the most important lessons of this outgoing century’s wide-ranging experiments in good and evil.

Things to think about in Pleasantville

In this film the safe and cheerful 1950s TV sitcom “Pleasantville” is revived in the 1990s for a loyal cable audience. One devoted fan is shy suburban teen David Wagner (Tobey Maguire), who has an almost obsessive interest in the series. He is not happy in his own world – not at school and not at home. He lives with his divorced mother (Jane Kaczmarek), and often fights with his popular and rebellious twin sister Jennifer (Reese Witherspoon). She wants to watch MTV just when a Pleasantville marathon is about to begin. They struggle over the remote control, and it breaks. A strange TV repairman (Don Knotts) supplies their new remote, a potent high-tech device which zaps David and Jennifer inside Pleasantville, where their new sitcom parents are businessman George Parker (William H. Macy) and wife Betty (Joan Allen). As “Bud” and “Mary Sue,” the teens take up residence in a black-and-white suburbia where sex does not exist and the temperature is always 72 degrees. Life is always pleasant, books have no words, bathrooms have no toilets, married couples sleep in twin beds, the high school basketball team always wins, and nobody ever questions “The Good Life.” David revels in Pleasantville’s sanitised peaceful world. He fits right in, but Jennifer’s 1990s attitude upsets the blandness balance, painting parts of Pleasantville in living colour. Repressed desires surface, cracks appear in the 1950s lifestyles, and the Pleasantville citizens find their lives changing in strange but wonderful ways. It is liberating – but the film shows us that there’s also a darker side and that is also explored in the film.

Things to think about:

  • Pleasantville is a film of contrasts. Study the thematic contrasts that exist as well as the production techniques used to communicate contrast.
  • TV Quote: “I know what I’d feel like if my TV broke; like I’d lost a friend.”-TV ‘repairman’

     

  • Look at the theme of destiny–everything is scripted, has a place. What about our lives?

     

  • Religious imagery: garden of Eden, offering of apple, rainbow over Pleasantville, trial of Bud, etc

     

  • Importance of books. Two books that were highlighted prominently in the film are Huckleberry Finn and Catcher in the Rye; going to the library is ‘in’!

     

  • Censorship: “It seems to me we must separate out the things that are unpleasant from the things that are pleasant.”- mayor of Pleasantville. Personal expression and differences become unacceptable. Anything wandering from what is known is feared.

     

  • Racism: “No coloureds.”-sign in Pleasantville window “Coloureds” are people who have become enlightened or who become passionate; they are rejected from mainstream Pleasantville. Think about our own world as differences are not tolerated all over the globe: World War II history.

     

  • Review the “8 Rules of Pleasantville.” See how they apply to certain institutions in our own world-church, schools, homes.

     

  • Rule #8 is worth focussing on: “Non-change-ist view of history is to be taught in all courses in the curriculum.” Does our own education have a non-change-ist attitude?

     

  • Take a closer look at the mural painted by Bill-analyse certain other symbols that represent freedom (he uses books, wings, etc.)

     

  • Scene at the end of the movie of a sign that says SPRINGFIELD 12 is significant on a number of levels: first, it gives us an indication that people in Pleasantville now have a notion that a world exists beyond its own borders; secondly, Springfield is the setting of the real sit-com, Father Knows Best; third, Springfield is also the setting of The Simpsons‘ which is a parody of 50s family perfection, which, of course, never really existed as Pleasantville makes clear.

     

Recap of the significance of colour in Pleasantville

When David and Jennifer get trapped within the traditional 1950s-style television show Pleasantville, the film changes from colour to black-and-white. Later as we have discussed, coloured portions begin to appear in shots, representing freedom and individual thought. We understand  that in our time that experiencing and experiencing emotions is OK and that the black-and-white aspects of the shots represent more conformist values of ages past, when people’s personal emotions were kept hidden. Later in Pleasantville, some characters change to colour, while more conservative, closed-minded characters remain in black and white. These differences eventually causes a rift between colourful characters and black and white ones. An example is David, who has looked towards conservative values and has been black and white for most of the film, suddenly turns coloured after defending Betty, his Pleasantville mother from bullies. It is important to note the specific significance of colour (or lack of it) and evaluate the significance of colour as a language of its own that is used to create meaning and characterisation in the film.