The Architecture of the Screen

by Graham Cairns

  Although this sensation is produced by characteristics of the physical space, it is heightened by the use of a series of cinematographic techniques: the employment of a wide angle lens producing the optical effect of an elongated space, for example. This makes Kane appear exaggeratedly small and even more physically distant than he is in reality; an effect further underlined by the use of shots in which his wife fills the screen in the foreground. In order to add even more layers to this sense of emotional distance, the camera films from a relatively high position. It thus reveals more of the floor and, by extension, the distance that separates the two estranged protagonists. Additionally, the few pieces of furniture to be found in the room are positioned at some distance from one another with the result that the sense of the space being totally inappropriate for the intimacy of a personal relationship is emphasised.

  Although more than enough to stress the emotional undertones of the scene, these effects are again underlined through the scene’s lighting; spot lights illuminating each of the protagonists individually and thus leaving the space between them in darkness. This darkness extends to the ceiling which is, apparently, too high to fit in shot. The sensation that the room is an enormous vacuum from which the emotion of the protagonists has disappeared is underlined one final time through the imposition of an echo effect on the dialogue. The final result is that the balanced presentation that makes the scene easily understandable as an object of “cinematographic spatial construction” acquires a whole range of symbolic resonances that overlay it.

  Figure 1: Establishing shot: the line of action.

  Figure 2: Shot-counter shot sequence.

  Citizen Kane. Scene 2. As with the previous example, this scene employs the cut as the basis of its cinematographic construction but, rather than respect the norms of the continuity system in order to create a sense of spatial clarity and balance, it deliberately breaks the 180 degree rule so as to fragment and energise the space it presents. It centres on a celebratory meal held in the offices of The Tribune, the first major newspaper bought by the young protagonist. It begins with an establishing shot that, although clearly definable as such, is not conventional. Instead of showing both main protagonists on different sides of the screen, it positions them in the centre of the image – one in the foreground and the other in the background. Placing the camera behind the main character, Kane, the camera films along what would normally be the line of action and, consequently, the space is not revealed with the clarity normally associated with an opening continuity shot (Fig. 3).

  Figure 3: Establishing shot.

  Despite this unconventional opening, the relative positions of the two protagonists, Kane and his most faithful friend Bernstein, are clear enough given that the camera is at a sufficient distance from the action to reveal the space. Initially they joke amongst themselves in a shot–counter shot sequence that only subtly breaks the norms of Hollywood convention. It is a sequence of cuts in which neither the camera nor the actors stay in their initial positions and, as a result, there is a certain graphic dislocation in what follows. However, these dislocations are relatively unnoticeable and only really begin to disrupt our clear understanding of the space as the meal develops into a party with the arrival of a dancing troop that enter the scene doing the can-can (Fig. 4).

  Figure 4: Breaking the line of action.

  At this point, the entirely male cast swivel in their seats or take up new vantage points from which to watch the show. As the actors physically reorder the space, the can-can girls pull Kane from the crowd so that he dances in the centre of the room. The rhythm of the cutting is now noticeably increased and the changes in camera position become more exaggerated and random, completely disregarding the 180 degree rule.11 Given the interrelated nature of any cinematographic spatial construction, this way of filming initiates a sequence of other aesthetic, compositional and choreographic decisions that also contribute to the dynamic spatial perception constructed on screen, the “cinematographic space”.

  We are presented with different and complex choreographies; we simultaneously see the dance routine of the girls, the movements of the male cast around the room and the changes of Kane’s location on the dance floor. Overlaying several protagonist trajectories on top of the camera’s movements, the irregular and at times chaotic optical perception of the scene is augmented. This is further heightened by the fact that the changing camera position presents the viewer with constantly changing perspectives of the space. The same architectural elements, columns, beams and windows, for example, are seen at different angles, as foreground then background features and in randomly arranged sequences. The graphic compositional effect this creates inevitably functions as another factor in the fragmentary cinematographic construction of the whole12 (Figs. 5, 6).

  Figure 5: The cut: fragmenting space i.

  Figure 6: The cut: fragmenting space ii.

  According to the logic of the continuity system, this fragmented filming and presentation of the space from contradictory points of view should disrupt our easy reading of the scene. In order to avoid this however, the camera films in medium or medium-long shot throughout, so as to present the viewer with spatial references that are always visible in the background. In addition, Welles also extends the length of time each shot remains on screen to a couple of seconds, thus allowing the eye time to process all the necessary pointers which facilitate the constant spatial reorientation necessary to follow the action. The result is a fragmentary spatial perception, but one that the director carefully controls and which the viewer can follow with relatively little effort.

  Citizen Kane. Scene 3. In this scene we see Kane in one of the lowest points of his professional career as, in response to losses caused by the crash of 1929, he is forced to relinquish control of a great part of his media empire. Once again the scene commences with an establishing shot that does not conform to the usual norms by restricting our view to a single action in the foreground. Positioned on the right-hand side of the screen, Bernstein reads a legal document that covers the left part of the image (Fig. 7). It is not until a little while later when he lowers the document that the entire scene and space is revealed: Kane’s bank manager, Thatcher, is seen in the middle ground and, subsequently, Kane appears in the background (Fig. 8). Once all the protagonists are introduced, the treatment of the space underlines the seriousness and sobriety of the events related. The camera remains fixed and films in one single long take, thus creating a completely static spatial sensation within which a cautious, deliberate dialogue ensues.13

  Figures 7–9: The long take sequence.

  In order to maintain this sensation throughout the scene, there are a number of compositional and choreographic techniques that the director is obliged to use; the first of which being the positioning of each protagonist so as they appear in shot at all times. Thus, we see Bernstein in the foreground to the right, Thatcher in the middle ground to the left and Kane centrally positioned in the background. This spatial arrangement allows the dialogue between the three to proceed without a change in camera position or a cut at any point.14 Here, the changes of attention that inevitably accompany the dialogue between any two or more protagonists are made by the spectator whose eye follows the verbal action as it passes between different parts of the space.

  The ease with which we follow this spatially separated dialogue is augmented through the employment of uniform illumination in each depth plane that maintains each protagonist clearly visible and distinguishable throughout the scene. Similarly, there is a strict control over the movements of the actors who are restricted to positions or lines of movement that maintain them in shot at all times. These characteristics allow the scene to communicate a sense of gravitas through its static filming, but they also produce compositional characteristics that lend the scene a certain symbolic meaning. Kane is positioned in the background at a great distance from those who determine his fate (Fig. 9). Emphasising his impotence in the face of what is happening around h
im, this distancing of the protagonist is exaggerated through the use of a wide-angled lens which again increases the apparent depth of the spaces it films.15

  In this case, the wide angle shot also increases the difference in scale between Kane placed in the background, and both Thatcher and Bernstein positioned closer to the camera. Further underlined by placing Kane below one of the enormous windows that illuminate the room so that his head does not even reach the window sill, it is an effect that emphasises his insignificance and momentary weakness even further. What is seen in this scene is another example of symbolic cinematographic construction in which both the nature of the space being filmed, and the nature of the filming style used, emphasise the narrative theme being dealt with. In this case, it is the scale of the architecture in question and the decision to eliminate movement and cutting to create a static spatial impression that are key to the scene’s solemnity and “cinematographic construction”.

  Citizen Kane. Scene 4. The following scene is one of the most sophisticated in the film and produces a spatial sensation that is as complicated as it is subtle. Set whilst Kane is still a child, it deals with the decision of his poor parents, who have recently come into money, to send him to Chicago where he will be educated under the tutelage of Thatcher. It begins with an image of the child Kane playing in the snow in front of the family house. From this initial starting point, the camera begins a slow but continuous backward tracking movement that takes it through an open window into the house where, once inside, it continues along its route introducing the scene’s three principal protagonists successively: Kane’s mother, Thatcher and finally his father. Without resorting to a cut at any moment, it moves along a lineal path that ensures we maintain a clear view of the child through the window at all times.16

  This route is coordinated with the movements of the protagonists who, one by one, begin to walk forwards following the route marked out by the camera’s trajectory. The movements of the three actors, and those of the camera, are perfectly interlaced and coordinated until the camera reaches the end of the house where it stops and the actors take up their final static positions (Figs. 10–12). Once set in position at the end of the room, the now static camera presents another deep space composition that again takes on symbolic meaning. In the background, we still see the unworried child Kane, in the middle ground we have the father who plays a secondary role in the events depicted, whilst in the foreground are the scene’s two dominant characters, the mother and Thatcher. This compositional division is reinforced by the use of architectural elements that separate the shot’s different depth planes. The background is demarcated by a wall through whose window we see the child in the distance, whilst the middle ground is defined by the introduction of a partition wall visible on the right-hand side of the image.

  More than simply operating as a compositional device however, this spatial arrangement has certain symbolic and narrative functions as well. The partition wall seen in the middle ground demarcates a limit that the father does not pass, despite his disagreement with the events in the foreground, that is, the signing of the relevant documentation to send the child to Chicago. Upon limiting himself to a secondary position, his secondary and resigned role is clearly evidenced and even emphasised, as is that of the child whose location in the background underlines his complete innocence and separation from the decisions that concern his future (Fig. 13). Over and above this symbolic compositional treatment however, the scene’s real sophistication lies in the manner in which it deals with the transition from the exterior to the interior seen earlier in the sequence.

  In this transition, the various thematic and spatial changes that occur are dealt with in such a way that they are almost imperceptible; something that requires the manipulation of multiple compositional, choreographic and filmic questions. Stemming from the decision to film in one long take with a moving camera, and in a space of reduced size, it became necessary to devise a tightly controlled lineal path along which all the action would take place. This technique enables the gradual and sequential revelation of the protagonists and the different architectural elements of the interior which, once introduced, remain visible for the duration of the scene. The deceptive simplicity of this technique minimises the sense of visual change by clearly making all modifications to the on-screen image both gradual and sequential. Despite the smoothness of the changes however, they are significant; a switch between two spaces and two narrative themes.

  The fluidity of the scene’s narrative and spatial transitions is emphasised by choreographing the movements of the protagonists with those of the camera and organising their respective trajectories into a single fluid current; the protagonists seemingly drawn into the slip stream that the camera leaves behind it. It is also emphasised by overlaying the continuous dialogue of the protagonists onto the sequence of spatial and narrative changes introduced. In this way, the attention of the viewer remains unbroken at all times despite the visual changes occurring throughout.17 The result in this case is the presentation of two physically separated spaces, as if the threshold between them was a fluid transitional zone, when, in reality, it is a clearly demarcated physical barrier. It is an example of cinematic spatial construction that uses basic filming and directorial techniques to manipulate our reading of the space presented into a smooth and organic phenomenon.

  Figures 10–13: The long take travelling shot and compositional control through space(s).

  What each of these scenes shows is that the construction of spatial perception on screen is a complicated procedure involving a multitude of complimentary factors including the characteristics of cinematographic construction identified earlier: “aesthetic”, “compositional and choreographic” and the “filming style”. In each example, different combinations of these factors create very different spatial perceptions: balanced and controlled in the first instance; fragmented and disjunctive in the second; static and ordered in the third; and fluid and mobile in the last. They are thus ideal examples of what are termed “cinematographic space”, “physical space” and “cinematographic construction” that allow us to set up the terms of reference necessary for the more detailed exercises of the architectural-cinematic workshop for which this outline of Citizen Kane functions as an introduction.

  Notes

  1This distinction stems in part from the author’s work with Hybrid Artworks and their manipulation of the physical performance/installation site by the projection of filmic imagery and the deliberate recording and projection of the art imagery so as to produce specific “spatial effects”. It is applied to an analysis of narrative film on a similar basis.

  2In the age of digital media and computer-generated graphics, this is clearly ever more the case. However, the specific “cinematographic” analysis offered here avoids these particular techniques as they involve a range of ideas beyond our scope of interest. The techniques of concern in our cinematographic and optical framework are more standard and long standing. For general information on digital imaging in film, see: Cousins, Mark. The Story of Film, Pavilion, London, 2011. p. 436–485; Willis, Holly. New Digital Cinema: Reinventing the Moving Image, Wallflower Press, New York, 2005. One of the authors to have most extensively commented upon the emergence of digital imaging in film and computer environments in contemporary culture is Lev Manovich. Amongst his introductory works of interest in this specific context are “Reading New Media”, 1995; “What Is Digital Cinema?”, 1995; “Cinema and Digital Media”, 1995. For a full list of up-to-date articles, see: http://www.manovich.net. For specific commentaries on the use of digital imagery, its relationship with film’s presentation of architecture and the filmic-cinematographic concepts that have been developed from it, see: Hanson, Eric. “Digital Fiction: New Realism in Film Architecture”. Architectural Design: Architecture and Film II. Vol. 70, No. 1, 2000. p. 62–69; Damrau, Karin. “Fantastic Spatial Combinations in Film”. Architectural Design: Architecture and Film II. Ibid. p. 58–61.

  3Dav
id Bordwell and Kristen Thompson’s introductory text on “film art” offers a comprehensive introduction to this question, albeit framed in a standard media/film student context. See: Bordwell, David and Thompson, Kristen. Film Art: An Introduction, McGraw Hill, New York, 2001. p. 156–247.

  4A full analysis of Renoir’s approach to constructing “cinematographic space” is offered in Part 3 of this work. For other examinations of his work, see: Sesonske, Alexander. Jean Renoir, the French Films 1924–1939, Harvard University Press, New York, 1980; Bazin, André. Jean Renoir, Da Capo Press, New York, 1973.

  5For a basic introduction to standard lighting effects and approaches, see: Bordwell, David and Thompson, Kristen. Film Art: An Introduction, Ibid. p. 164–169.

  6A full analysis of Ozu’s approach to constructing “cinematographic space” is offered in Part 3 of this work in which his work is compared with that of Jean Renoir. For a general overview of Yasujiro Ozu, see: Richie, Donald. Ozu, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1974.

  7This film has been extensively documented in film and print. A basic overview of its “construction” can be found in: Carringer, Robert, L. The Making of Citizen Kane, University of California Press, Los Angeles, 1996.

  8For an overview analysis of the film’s narrative structure and themes, see: Bordwell, David and Thompson, Kristen. Film Art: An Introduction, Ibid. p. 78–88. The full screenplay of the film is available. See: Welles, Orson, Mankiewicz, Herman J. and Kael, Pauline. The Citizen Kane Book, Methuen Publishing, London, 1985.