Using the frame
When it comes to making creative choices as a director one of the big things that needs to be considered is the frame. That process begins in pre-production with shots lists and storyboarding, evolves in production when working with your DOP and Actors (not to mention logistical location issues) and finishes in post-production with digital repositioning, aspect ratio adjustments and other finishing touches.
A canvas or a window?
The first thing to consider when deciding on your framing is if it should be considered a canvas or a window. This decision will affect the way the audience feels about the unfolding story. Are the events they are watching limited by the edges of the frame the same way a painting or a stage performance limits what we see visually? Or is the frame the equivalent of a window of a much larger world where the audience continually has a sense of a bigger unseen world just off camera? In filmmaking this is known as having an open or closed frame:
Open Frames:
Definition: Open frames suggest a world that extends beyond the edges of the frame. They convey a sense of reality and continuity.
Characteristics: Often used in realistic, naturalistic, or documentary-style films, these frames feel fluid and dynamic.
Usage: Characters and actions might enter and exit the frame freely, indicating that the story continues outside the audience’s view.
Closed Frames:
Definition: Closed frames contain all necessary visual information within the frame. The world feels self-contained and complete.
Characteristics: These frames tend to be more structured, stylized, and controlled.
Usage: Often found in more formalistic or stylized films, where the focus is on visual composition and detail within the frame, with limited interaction beyond its borders.
Closed Frames
A great practitioner who’s work uses closed frames is Wes Anderson. Anderson’s work is meticulous in its construction. The production design choices and the way he blocks his actors are heightened to such a degree that his films are instantly recognisable. The framing works in conjunction with other elements of composition as well as a heightened acting style to create an aesthetically pleasing world and a sense of irony and whimsy.
The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou, Wes Anderson, 2004
Anderson, like many good film directors, takes inspiration from artists when planning his shots. I recommend all new film directors to look beyond films themselves for their references. Often those great shots you see in films have been inspired by painters or photographers. One case in point for Anderson is a shot from Moonrise Kingdom that clearly takes its inspiration from a painting by Alex Coville:
Moonrise Kingdom (2012), Wes Anderson - To Prince Edward Island (1965), Alex Colville
In the same film Anderson is inspired by the paintings of Normal Rockwell. This isn’t just an aesthetic choice. Importantly, it’s used to reinforce a sense of idyllic American childhood. Rockwell’s work is indicative of an ideal ‘50s Americana that triggers feelings of nostalgia and the past. Nostalgia as an emotion isn’t just for a (non-existent) past but a sense of the world we experienced as a child. Anderson plays on this to great effect to generate the bittersweet feelings of childhood memories and growing up.
Another director who uses closed frames is the Swedish director, Roy Andersson. Andersson’s work demonstrates technical choices commonly associated with closed frames, these being a wide depth of field and long duration shots. Andersson plays out whole scenes in continous takes, keeping his staging mostly within the boundaries of the frame but utilising depth to a great degree. I will talk about depth in greater detail in another blog post but anyone interested in that subject should certainly check out his work. Here’s a great example:
This clip is helpful because it shows that a closed frame doesn’t mean that the action is contained within physical walls (though that can be the case). It’s that the action is constrained within the frame and presented to the audience in the same way the image of a painting or the performance in a theatre is presented to an audience. If you are interested in this approach it is well worth looking at early cinema (before 1917) where film was often much more theatrical in nature.
Open Frames
American Honey (Andrea Arnold, 2016, US)
As metioned above, open frames can be thought of as windows on a much larger world. This gives the filmmaking a sense that the camera is capturing already existing action. It tends to occur more in films grounded in a realist or neorealist style. Often people and action are cut off at the edges of frame giving the sense that the camera is capturing events in real time. If you are taking this approach there is often a much looser (but no less planned) staging. Filmmakers who use this approach tend to let the performance lead the camera. Whilst this gives a sense of spontaneity and ‘captured reality’ it is no less staged than the more formal closed frame style. Subject matter often determines the use of open frames with films dealing with social or political issues often using open framing as a way to emulate the style of documentary or reportage filmmaking we see on TV. If you want to step up a level from simply emulating a documentary style you can use open frames very effectively to withold information from your audience. You also don’t have to use a handheld camera. Oners - continous shots that cover a scene - often move in space. These shots can feel just as staged as closed shots but the frame is open because we are moving around a scene rather than just presenting it. This is where the presentation of information works very effectively as you can control what the audience sees when. A great use of a staged open frame is from the film Michael Clayton (Tony Gilroy, 2007, US):
In this scene the long take means that the viewer gets no break from the death of the character. We are there with him through the duration. Simultaneously, the camera repositions itself to underscore dramatic moments (such as moving onto his face moments after he has died) and prepare itself for future dramatic beats (the killer’s fingers coming in to check for a pulse). Open frames are much more commonly used to create a sense of involvement with the spectator - they are generally more immersive. This can be combined with other aspects of filmmaking psychology to greater effect. I discuss this further in The Art of Directing Workshop and Course in the Psychology of Camera Module.
Which frame?
Your choice of frame can be made for a number of reasons:
Your personal aesthetic taste as a director
What best fits the screenplay and subject matter
How involved you want your spectator to be
The dramatic requirements of specific scenes
As the last point makes clear, it is entirely possible to vary the choice within the same film. As long as this is consciously determined in accordance with the dramatic demands of the story, and both choices fit well within the overal visual language for the film you have developed, this is perfectly fine. Additionally, there are degrees of difference between the two approaches. You can, for instance, have a scene that is mostly a closed frame but something can suddenly enter from off frame, disrupting the form. This can be very effective in signalling a dramatic change and/or giving your audience a jolt. A very good example of this is this shot sequence from Exorcist III (William Peter Blatty, 1990). Warning, whilst not gory, it is not for the fainthearted.
Frame within a frame
One final stylistic choice to mention, and something I’ll discuss in more detail in another post, is frame within a frame. This is where the director uses elements of mise en scène and/or light and shadow to create a different frame within the boundaries of the film frame itself. Dramatically and psychologically this opens up a ton of possibilities. This end shot from The Searchers shows how Ethan, our protagonist, can never really join the homestead he values and that his world is the ‘untamed’ wilderness he fights against. The world is literally invisible to him as shown by the darkness of the surrounding space. This underscores the tragic nature of the character’s inner life, creating a sense of sympathy in the audience and provokes them to consider the ambivalent relationship between land, history, and culture in the US.
The Searchers (John Ford, 1956, US)
The frame doesn’t even have to be rectangular. It can, for instance, be a person as shown here in The Graduate:
The Graduate (Mike Nichols, 1967, US)
This shot has become so iconic because it is loaded with meaning. Firstly, it’s visually interesting. Secondly, it focuses the eye on the area of interest. Thirdly, it demonstrates that Benjamin is both attracted and entrapped. Finally, it also depicts the power relationship between the two characters. I’m sure there are even more readings that can be taken from this shot. The important thing is that you, as a director, put the meaning in your shots by understanding how all the different levels of your character psychology and story theme can be presented visually, particularly through framing techniques.
If you are interested in finding out more about composition, particularly how it relates to the visual subtext and the psychology of filmmaking, check out our discounted upcoming workshop.
