Analysing the opening sequences of the movies.

Analysing the opening sequences of the movies.

I’ve picked three opening sequences,  in order to analyze how camera angles and movements reflect the genre and affect the audience: one from fantasy fiction and two from thriller-action movie and series: "Interception", "I am legend" and "The walking dead".

ITERCEPTION.

The sequence starts with fast close-up of Leo, which is a contrast to what is going on straight after – where the same character now looks differently(no bruises, no abrasions) and appears in mid "above the shoulder" shot, which establishes who is he talikng to. Those two shots follow one another what makes it look oddly, like two shots from different movies being accidently put together, or two shots from different times in the movie, what gives an audience a clue that the film is going to have many interesting layers in the plot. 

This eye level mid shot shows all three characters to make it clear for the audience that they are actually talking to each other. The person in the middle seem to be dominating due to how the mise-en-seen is created – he is sitting in the middle, like a chairperson, with two men on his sides slightly bended towards him, what makes the audience understand “who is the boss” and that two men is wanting something from him.

In this scene the character of Leo is trying to explain and persuade on something. That’s why a close up is used – the director needed to make emphasis on what he is saying and showing, on his emotions, on his very calm and confident face. This is effective for the audience as gives us a first taste of the character in his body language. I also think there might be a little low angle, what makes the character look dominating and important and us trying to listen to him more carefully.

I AM LEGEND.

We can see that opening sequence is layered in two parts: the news talk of two women and how the man is driving a car in the town. I’ll skip the news talk and go straight to the part with a man in the car, which starts with showing the views of the town and the establishing shot of a town straight from a "bird's eye", where the audience can see the destroyed buildings, abandoned cars, chaos everywhere, what instantly gives them a clue that the film is set in post-apocalypse world and that the genre of the movie is thriller/horror. 

This close-up goes straight after the establishing shot, even before we saw the face of the main hero – we see his gun. The director kind of says: “no matter who you are, you have to have a gun”. Again this shows the audience that something dangerous is happening in here, giving a clue and preparing for what will happen next. We can’t hear any gunshots or any suspicious sounds yet, but the main hero has taken his gun ALREADY, what makes us fell tense.

In this scene we can see wild animals running in the middle of ex-town. This is a long shot, but what’s more important – it’s low-angled, what makes creatures look strong and fast, scary, while we fell weaker. This scene also suggests that even the main hero may also reflect our feelings. In terms of mise-en-seen wild animals completely ruin a picture of big city and persuade us to fear and think of how massive was the tragedy to destroy the whole city and make people abandon it. This is also a sign of innocence – animals might not realize how dangerous their position is.

THE WALKING DEAD.

Here the opening sequence is also divided into two parts: before and after the main hero is being shot, to show how it affected his life and how he was dragged into the world of zombies. The first season starts straight with an awful picture of birds eating a dead animal. I believe it's a shocking metaphor to an actual purpose of the series - it's scary and it's effective for the audience. This is also a close-up and what's interesting -it's nearly eye-level, what puts us in the same position as cruel bird predators or dead animal victim, neither of which roles is good for us. This awakes feelings of panic and disgust in the audience.

These two close-ups are made in juxtaposition. The first one is before the apocalypse, another one is after. Facial expressions of the main hero in these shots do not change much – he is in pain – but the mise-en-scene is the one who dictates the reasons for this pain. The main thing about contrast is how the colors have been chosen: bright yellow and orange for the first one to symbolize normality and ordinary sunny day, and darker, blue and green for the second one to reflect the mood of mystery, death and illness. This contrast brings the audience into the world of the main hero and make them feel his panic and feeling of lost as he doesn't know, just as us, what had happened in between these two periods of time - it seems scary, odd and supernatural.

This is a long shot, which shows the settings of the hospital, how scary and abandoned this place is. Such shots are highly important for the horror movies, as they tend to shock and create tension within the audience.

Summing up, I would say that two thrillers had something in common: the way camera moves, contrasting close-ups and long shots, and the settings reflect the mystery and tense of the plot.

I really like the way the “Interception” and ‘The walking dead” both start with fast close-ups which have no connection with the plot what so ever(at that stage), this really drags the attention of the audience, slightly distracting them from the main plot.

I’ve also noticed that “above the shoulder shot” or “mid shot” are commonly used in dialogues to emphasize that characters talk to each other, this type of shots is used in the opening scenes of ‘Interspersion” and ‘I am legend”(the scene with a dog in the car).