Throughout the film there are extreme close-up shots and were exclusively done within the B52 Bomber. The first sense of this happens when the “FDG 135” message comes through on the communication dashboard. The dashboard is in a normal close-up in the being of the shoot (showing the message EDB 11) and is quickly zoomed into an extreme close-up shot to show the “FDG 135” message. The message is readable at the normal view but by zooming into the extreme close-up, it gave the scene a greater sense of urgency and the message more seriousness. For example, during the film when the captain was reading out the “Wing Attack Plan R”, I feel it intensified the situation when the camera distance was extreme close-up on every switch being turn. This gives the idea that the activation of C.R.M. 144 Discriminator is serious and was one step closer to a nuclear holocaust.
Below are picture showing the close-up and extreme close-up camera distance.
To offset the intention of nuclear war Kubrick add parodies to real life event as jokes on nuclear weapons and military secret. One example is when Russian ambassador, Alexei de Sadesky, stated that the soviets got all their information for the New York Times. This is a parody to the real life event that the “Soviet Union was easily able to gather most of its intelligence about U.S. secret plans from the New York Times” (Stillman 488). I found this to be amusing since one would expect the soviet to gather their information form espionage and operatives instead of a free press. Another more serious parody in the film is about the doomsday weapon and strategy were base on the which is base on the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) strategy. Stillman states that Kubrick did a great deal research on nuclear war and military strategies so that the strategies discussed in the film would be believable. Kubrick went to England and visited “Thomas Schelling and Herman Kahn, who could feed him the latest scary strategies, such as Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) or limited nuclear war on the battlefields of Europe” (Stillman 492). The film’s parody to real life cold war made the film funny but probably also frightening to the people at the time.
The B52 Bombers were fake props and looked like they are filmed in front of a green screen background. This sense occurs in the beginning of the film, when the narrator states that there is a fleet of B52 Bombers that are always airborne and 2 hour away from Russia, and throughout the film. I notice they were probes when I realized that the planes movements were strange and defied physics. The plans looked stiff and seem to glide across the sky unlike real plans. This is not as obvious in the scene described above since they somewhat hid it in that director add films of real planes in between the shots of the fake (model) B52 Bombers. Later in the film, it became apparent that the plans are props since rudders nor any other parts of the plane moved when it made turns and maneuvered. Here are picture of the model planes below.
Work Cited
Kubrick, Stanley, dir. Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned To Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb. 1964. Columbia Pictures, 2009.
Stillman, Grant, “Two of the MaDdest Scientist.” Film History. 20 (2008): 487-500. Web. 24 Aug. 2009.
I did not notice that the close camera angles helped to create a sense of urgency in the film, but now that you mentioned it, there are a lot of zoomed in shots that were not necessary in order to read the writing. Also, maybe the large quantity of close shots is a way of emphasizing the importance of what is happening with "Wing Attack Plan R."
ReplyDeleteI like your usage, detail and images of the close ups, especially with the messages that came through the transmitter onto the dash board because I mainly foun pitures that had DR. Stranglove himself, and pictures of the war room. Chris i also agree with your statement on how these close ups were use to illustrate the importance of Plan R.
ReplyDeleteAbdi, you definitely covered parts of the film that I did not. Good work finding plenty of extreme close up examples! Since I'm the only girl in our group I think it's my duty to point out the irony of female roles to the gentlemen on my team awesome. Isn't it strange that the only female featured in the movie is the secretary and throughout her entire part she is nearly nude?
ReplyDeleteGreat job with the Simpsons' picture. Humorous association.