Elizabeth's Claim As An Art Film example essay topic

Bordwell and Thompson define the art film as 'a film which, while made under commercial circumstances take an approach to form and style influenced by 'high art' which offers an alternative to mainstream entertainment' (1). Like avant-garde film making, this style offer the audience with a movie that takes glory in cinemas stance as a modern art form, for art house films are not just intended to be entertaining, they are designed to be imaginative. Shekhar Kapur's 1998 film 'Elizabeth' presents us with a contemporary art film. Although it does offer entertainment through a fascinating narrative, the film as a whole is presented in a creative way, owing to the auteur ish vision of Kapur.

Indeed, as the film is arguably British, abroad 'Elizabeth' by definition becomes as 'art film', since Bordwell and Thompson also define the term 'art house' as a phrase 'used by the U. S film industry to describe imported films of interest to upper -middle class, educated audiences' (2). In America, 'Elizabeth' was packaged solely as an 'art film', or at least an 'art' interpretation of the British Heritage thriller film. This labelling is of course debatable and by comparing the fundamental ideas regarding art films to 'Elizabeth', one can access the validity of its claim to being 'cinematic art'. The characteristics of an 'art cinema' film are best outlined in David Bordwell's article 'The Art Cinema as a Mode of Film Practice' and this text will form the basis of my assessment of 'Elizabeth'. Bordwell suggests that 'art cinema defines itself explicitly against the classical narrative' (3), yet 'Elizabeth' is clearly conventional in narrative style. Film analyst Wendy Ide, even suggests that 'Elizabeth' follows the tradition three act narrative set-up precisely, with climaxes at the end of each act.

As proof she suggests that Queen Mary's death is the climatic resolution to the first act, 'which takes place exactly 30 minutes into the film' following the traditions of narrative ideals (4). Bordwell, goes on to also suggest that the 'cause effect linkage of events' is 'tenuous in the art film' (5), yet this narrative technique is used continually to advance 'Elizabeth's' narrative. For example, 40 minutes into the film, the royal court debate the danger of an impending 'French attack' (6). Queen Elizabeth resolves to send an army, prompting a new narrative strand. The result of this (cause) is shown almost immediately (42 minutes into the film) for in a graphic scene the audience comes to realise that English army has been defeated; the resolution to this specific narrative strand has been provided. Consequently, a cause effect trail of events has been established, opposing Bardwell's view and jeopardizing 'Elizabeth's' claim as an art film.

Borwell goes on to suggest that 'Art cinema defines itself as a realistic cinema' (7) and consequently its films exhibit realism. This idea is supported by the content of 'Elizabeth' as the director Kapur strive d to achieve 'historical accuracy and realism' (8). To achieve this level of realism, a large proportion of 'Elizabeth' was filmed in authentic locations. 'Elizabeth' adheres to Bordwell's belief that 'art films' present 'Documentary realism's' (9), as the film is retelling historical fact in the fictional form of the movie. A large proportion of the characteristics that makes up 'art films', are the results of character reflections on screen. Indeed, Borwell suggests that in 'art films', 'characters and the effect on one and other remain central' (10).

This is reflected in 'Elizabeth' a character driven piece with little action. The film follows the struggle of the central protagonist, a pre-requisite of the art house style, as Elizabeth struggles to enact her beliefs to a royal court that opposes her. The queen becomes 'a supersensitive individual' as she is forced to decide between her obligations as a queen and her personal desires; 'social forces impinges upon the psychologically sensitive individual' (11). As one is able to introduce Bordwell's art house requirements into an 'Elizabeth's' critique, its claim as an art form becomes all the more valid.

Having said that, Bordwell also suggest that 'art' 'characters lack defined desires and goals' (12). This naturally is not true in 'Elizabeth' as both Norfolk and Elizabeth are driven by ambition. Perhaps, this is because the ambition of the queen is central to the narrative; consequently Kapur felt obliged to include Elizabeth's ambition. Indeed, this diversion from 'art house' conventions may be an attempt to broaden the audience for 'Elizabeth'. There is always a level of ambiguity Bordwell argues, for the narration of art at cinema is built from the 'posing [of] enigmas' (13). Enigma settings are a key device used by directors to engage an audience and it is certainly evident in the (at time) deliberately ambiguous 'Elizabeth'.

For example, the character of Sir Francis Walsingham (Geoffrey Rush) is introduced slaying a young French man (Ben Fra in) an action that is not expected, nor answered in the remainder of the film. Similarly Bordwell suggests that to add to the ambiguity 'characters may wander out and never return, events lead to nothing' (14). This is also evident in 'Elizabeth', where Monsieur Le Fix (Eric Canton a) is prominent in the second act, yet redundant in the third act. His departure is not seen, nor overtly referred to within the film, despite being principle character role. 'Elizabeth' also offers 'the open ended narrative' and the story will 'lack [s] a clear resolution' (15). The queen's blank stare in the closing shot and post film text, all alludes that further plot is central, yet unseen.

These unexplained elements all contributes to the films ambiguity and vagueness, an essential quality in the 'art film'. The final and perhaps most integral aspect of the 'art film' is the 'author as a formal component' (16). Bordwell believes that there are 'stylistic signatures in [an art film's] narration' and 'the work of the expressive individual' director (17). Film critic Steve Neal concurs saying that 'all art films tend to be marked by stress on visual style' (18). Director Kapur fulfils this requirement with ease in 'Elizabeth' presenting the audience with a distinct visual style. Aspects of the director's style include: Alterations between extreme light and dark, which is most obvious when Elizabeth is fist tired and convicted to a sentence in the Tower of London.

Before capture she is shown outside, brilliantly lit almost over exposed. However after her imprisonment she is shown in darkness, illuminated by subtly placed candlelight's. Obviously the light and dark shots have thee connotations of innocence and evilness, yet its implementation in Elizabeth is apt and appropriate for the mood of the film and its subtext. A more interesting seen to study though is the aforementioned battle scene. 'The battle is presented in a stylized manner' (19), a stream slowly fills with blood as the camera pans to reveal increasingly more bodies littering the battlefield.

The audience is only shown the after mark, as the action is not necessary to narrative. A lesser director, would of course have shown the brutality of the fight yet, Kapur's restraint and sensitivity makes the effect of the scene all the more powerful. There are also 'countless other shots through curtains, veils grilles and other framing devices' and 'the camera is always positioned so we are looking down as if from a stage' (20). Critic Pamela Church Gibson suggests that the film is both 'innovative and radical' (21), its style and content of course is undeniably influenced by art cinema traditions, yet these traditions are implemented in away that will offer the film to a wider audience than the 'high brow middle classes'...