WEBVTT
00:00:05.000 --> 00:00:08.240
Hi my name is Tony and this is Every
Frame a Painting. Let's take a drive.
00:00:08.240 --> 00:00:11.809
Today’s subject is Martin Scorsese
and the art of silence.
00:00:11.809 --> 00:00:15.780
Even though Scorsese is famous for his
use of music, one of his best traits
00:00:15.780 --> 00:00:18.940
is actually his deliberate and
powerful use of silence.
00:00:18.940 --> 00:00:22.109
In interviews he’s credited Frank Warner
for helping him do this on Raging Bull.
00:00:22.109 --> 00:00:26.090
--After a while, we had so many sound
effects, we always talked about pulling
00:00:26.090 --> 00:00:29.490
them out of the track and
letting things go silent.
00:00:29.490 --> 00:00:32.910
Again, like a numbing effect as if you
were hit in the ear too many times.
00:00:32.910 --> 00:00:35.809
Here’s a famous moment where
Jake LaMotta sets himself up
00:00:35.809 --> 00:00:37.870
almost a religious slaughter.
00:00:49.870 --> 00:00:53.789
If you go through Scorsese’s filmography
there are lots of interesting variations
00:00:53.789 --> 00:00:57.050
on this concept. And you can actually
compare him directly to others.
00:00:57.050 --> 00:00:59.930
For instance, in the original
Infernal Affairs,
00:00:59.930 --> 00:01:02.850
this crucial story moment
plays with music.
00:01:07.850 --> 00:01:09.850
But for the remake
00:01:16.040 --> 00:01:18.700
Regardless of which one you prefer,
there’s a full course of study material
00:01:18.700 --> 00:01:20.900
if you watch and compare these two films
00:01:21.900 --> 00:01:25.700
Sometimes, Scorsese builds the
entire film to a climax of sound
00:01:29.060 --> 00:01:33.160
and then silence. This example is
actually kinda extreme because
00:01:33.160 --> 00:01:36.990
the loudest moment in the entire movie
is immediately followed by the quietest.
00:01:36.990 --> 00:01:41.750
Other times the silence is the central
dramatic beat of the scene. Famously:
00:01:41.750 --> 00:01:45.930
--How the fuck am I funny? What the fuck
is so funny about me? Tell me.
00:01:45.930 --> 00:01:47.930
Tell me what's funny.
00:01:53.130 --> 00:01:58.119
--Get the fuck outta here, Tommy.
If you go back through fifty years of
00:01:58.119 --> 00:02:01.210
his career, you'll actually find a lot
of fascinating ways of using silence
00:02:01.210 --> 00:02:05.170
to heighten the subjectivity of a moment
to make a creepy scene even creepier
00:02:05.170 --> 00:02:06.649
to show us love at first sight
00:02:06.649 --> 00:02:09.269
and to bring our happiness
to a screeching halt.
00:02:13.269 --> 00:02:15.870
Well, maybe not a total halt.
00:02:15.870 --> 00:02:17.489
--I'm not leaving
00:02:19.489 --> 00:02:21.840
--I'm not fucking leaving
00:02:23.840 --> 00:02:28.019
I think best of all, these sound design
choices derive from character.
00:02:28.019 --> 00:02:31.709
The characters are all making important
choices that will have consequences:
00:02:31.709 --> 00:02:35.080
choosing to take the money
choosing not to fight back,
00:02:35.080 --> 00:02:37.769
choosing to hide their emotions
choosing not to trust someone,
00:02:37.769 --> 00:02:39.650
choosing to wait out the discomfort
00:02:39.650 --> 00:02:42.000
choosing to get back in the game
choosing to ignore that
00:02:42.000 --> 00:02:43.500
they aren't wanted.
00:02:43.500 --> 00:02:46.989
And because these moments are repeated
sparingly and deliberately in each movie
00:02:46.989 --> 00:02:49.970
the silence feels different
and it’s tied to a different theme.
00:02:49.970 --> 00:02:53.799
It also lets Scorsese build a cinematic
structure around the use of sound.
00:02:53.799 --> 00:02:58.060
For instance, in Raging Bull, almost
every fight scene is actually preceded
00:02:58.060 --> 00:03:00.200
by a quieter domestic moment.
00:03:00.200 --> 00:03:03.350
This lets him do certain things
like harsh cuts into punches.
00:03:03.350 --> 00:03:06.620
But it also underscores the theme of
the film, which is that the violence
00:03:06.620 --> 00:03:08.910
in the ring is just an extension
of the violence at home.
00:03:08.910 --> 00:03:12.109
By the time he’s attacking his brother,
you actually hear the same sounds
00:03:14.880 --> 00:03:16.950
that you heard in the ring.
00:03:17.950 --> 00:03:20.709
And it’s not just Scorsese who does
this kind of cinematic structure.
00:03:20.709 --> 00:03:24.010
For instance, Saving Private Ryan is
bookended by two long battles.
00:03:24.010 --> 00:03:26.190
And in each battle,
we get moment like this.
00:03:30.190 --> 00:03:32.470
At the beginning, we don’t know
any of these people.
00:03:32.470 --> 00:03:34.389
At the end, we know all of them.
00:03:34.389 --> 00:03:36.579
Now, you might disagree
with my interpretation here,
00:03:36.579 --> 00:03:40.340
but I’m convinced this character knows
he’s going to die, and in both moments,
00:03:40.340 --> 00:03:42.760
he’s accepting that and
continuing to fight.
00:03:42.760 --> 00:03:46.440
And I think it's a great example using
sound as an overall cinematic structure
00:03:46.440 --> 00:03:48.190
for the whole film.
00:03:49.190 --> 00:03:51.859
I do want to point out, this stuff isn’t
just a matter of good sound mixing
00:03:51.859 --> 00:03:54.510
though there is that. The sound mixers
can’t do this stuff if you design the
00:03:54.510 --> 00:03:57.540
movie with wall-to-wall
dialogue, effects and music.
00:03:58.190 --> 00:04:02.269
--I don't have anything
against a film being loud
00:04:02.269 --> 00:04:06.930
for a moment or two or a short period of
time. I think that's appropriate
00:04:06.930 --> 00:04:11.359
but if you have a sequence that's loud
for 20 or 30 minutes
00:04:11.359 --> 00:04:15.040
you've forgotten what it's like
to be quiet and so
00:04:15.040 --> 00:04:18.540
nothing really seems loud because
everything is loud.
00:04:18.540 --> 00:04:22.048
In popular cinema, writers and directors
have moved away from having
00:04:22.048 --> 00:04:25.479
any silence at all, or misusing
the silence they do have.
00:04:25.479 --> 00:04:28.110
And this is something that gets
appreciably worse each year.
00:04:28.110 --> 00:04:30.110
Consider. 1978.
00:04:37.580 --> 00:04:40.350
You might find that a bit cheesy,
but at least this movie is willing
00:04:40.580 --> 00:04:43.350
to use silence to make us
feel the character’s loss.
00:04:43.350 --> 00:04:46.600
And it’s willing to stay with him
through that entire silence.
00:04:48.600 --> 00:04:50.960
Meanwhile, in 2013
00:04:58.000 --> 00:05:00.460
This might seem silent but
there’s always music underneath.
00:05:00.460 --> 00:05:04.789
More importantly the “not-quite-silence”
is used to reward the character:
00:05:05.430 --> 00:05:09.560
he murders someone and gets a hug.
But if you watch the whole movie
00:05:09.560 --> 00:05:11.759
literally ever time there’s silence,
he gets a hug.
00:05:14.759 --> 00:05:17.229
So consider your silences
and deploy them deliberately.
00:05:17.229 --> 00:05:20.479
Don’t cheapen them by overusing
them for any dramatic scene.
00:05:20.479 --> 00:05:23.550
If you can build the film, structure it,
so that the silence derives
00:05:23.550 --> 00:05:24.990
from your characters and what
they’re feeling, then you get
00:05:24.990 --> 00:05:29.150
something better than just
silence: an emotional reaction
00:05:29.150 --> 00:05:32.220
--Which would be worse?
00:05:32.220 --> 00:05:38.220
To live as a monster or
to die as a good man?
00:05:46.120 --> 00:05:47.370
--Teddy?