Welcome to Beaver's House

Here are a few clips to get us into the mindset of a typical 1950s movie goer. These films are samples of the predominantly reactionary attitudes of the 1950s. These reactionary attitudes favored themes such as the following:

• Conservatism
• Pro-military attitudes
• Traditional values
• Fear (outsiders, homosexuals, communism, atomic fallout, the unknown)
• Knowledge as a potential danger

Keep in mind that a progressive film, such as A Streetcar Named Desire, would by their very nature wish to question these ideals.

Some terms to remember: A reactionary is a person who holds political viewpoints that favor a return to a previous state (the status quo) in a society. A progressive is a person who advocates or favors gradual social, political, and economic change (reform).

Appreciating Our Parents (1950)

Duck and Cover (1951)

Soapy the Germ Fighter (1951)

Drug Addiction (1950)

Leave it to Beaver (1959)

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956)

The History of Sci-Fi Cinema part II - The 1950s

COMMON THEMES

of Science Fiction of the 1950s

conservative, traditional values

pro-military attitudes

Fear! (of outsiders, homosexuals, communism, atomic fallout)

Danger! (the unknown, the future, knowledge)

The Thing from another World

COMMON STYLES

of Science Fiction of the 1950s

'retro clunk' and geometrically boxy

COMMON TONES

of Science Fiction of the 1950s

dramatic and horrific

What's Your Pick of Pics?

I would like your opinion. Which of these two films would you most like to watch for the first film in our science fiction unit?

1950's Sci-Fi Roundup

Here are a few trailers from some 1950s sci-fi classics. Take a look, and then I have a few questions for you.











What themes and stylistic choices do these movies appear to share with Forbidden Planet? You might wish to consider man's fear of knowledge, fear of the unknown, fear of change, fear of communism and homsexuality, pro-military attitudes, conservative attitudes, etc.

Also, how do these movies come across as different from Forbidden Planet - visually, tone, budget, acting, etc.

Captured by the Frame - Part II

A few posts ago we were discussion how in his Invasion of the Body Snatchers Don Siegel used the frame itself to create a sense of paranoia and claustrophobia. There is literally no way out for the characters – they are hunted by the camera and blocked in by the image itself. In the comments, someone mentioned that The Descent did a good job of this as well, and I said I’d get some images up. Well, here they are. (Click on them to make them bigger.)

Pretty scrunched in, huh? She's not merely in a cave, she's being crushed by its mass. But it gets better. check these out...

See how the darkness just literally crushes them with black? Most filmmakers don't have the nerve to show this much black on the screen for this amount of time. In most cave movies, there's lots of blue light, and lots of close ups and medium shots. Heck,  I bet most filmmakers wouldn't even have enough imagination to consider showing long shots in a cave. Also, notice how the characters in these shots are far off center. I'm not sure, but I almost think the negative space becomes the subject of these shots, not the characters themselves.

Here's my favorite shot of the movie. A woman climbing a hill of bones towards the light.

I've watched the movie in the theater and at home. I have to say, this is definately one film in which the lardgess and darkness of a theater adds to effect of the film - that sense of despair and hopelessness. I'd be curious, have any of you seen The Descent? And if so, did you find the cinematography effective in terms of creating a sense of dread and fear? The rest of you, do these shots make you want to see the film, or are you put off by how much you don't get to see?

P.S. Yes, this is a monster movie. And yes, there are monsters. And they're everywhere...in the dark...where you can't see them. That's another reason why there's so much dark - because there are so many monsters.

Invaded, Snatched, and Captured...by the Frame

I watched Invasion of the Body Snatchers this weekend with my two youngest. It was released in 1956, and, boy, does it sure hold up. For those of you unfamiliar with Invasion, here’s a quick plot synopsis: A small town doctor discovers that aliens are taking over earth by replacing humans one by one with human-looking pod people grown from alien seed pods. After a point, the doctor doesn’t know who to trust. Anyone could be an alien, but how can you tell? The film, of course, is famous for mimicking the communist scare that was sweeping America at the time. How can we protect ourselves from outsiders who wish to change our very way of life when those outsiders look just like you or me? Who can we trust? No one, that’s who!

I was afraid my kids wouldn't like the movie because it doesn't actually show any alien lifeforms...just human-looking pod people duplicates. In part, this was done for budgetary restrictions. It is, after all, much cheaper to film a guy dressed as a policeman and say he's an alien invader rather than putting him in a mask and suit sitting at a futuristic control panel and show that he's an alien invader.

But this lack of special effects actually adds to the film’s effectiveness. Kind of like how the mechanical shark used in Jaws never worked properly, so Spielberg fashioned his story around a monster the audience rarely saw. Spielberg himself has said numerous times that he thinks this adds to the terror of the shark, and if the shark had worked the way it was supposed to, the movie would have turned out far inferior.

But back to Invasion. Here we have a doctor and his girlfriend running around, trying to get out of town, all the while being chased and hunted by creatures that resemble their friends and neighbors. And here’s what struck me this time while watching the film: director Don Siegel uses the camera’s frame itself to hunt and capture the characters along with the aliens. Just look at this shot:

See how the buildings and cars on either side of them create visual walls through which the characters cannot escape? Even the reflection of light in the center of the frame is like a path leading them in only one direction. And that direction is totally illuminated. They can run, but they can’t hide. Here’s another:

It’s almost the identical shot, only this time it’s a tight hallway, with only one way to go. And when they finally get to the door at the end…

It’s locked. And they have to head back towards the camera. Heck, the camera doesn’t even follow them down the hall. Why? Because it knows the door is locked and that they’ll be coming back. The camera becomes, to some degree, the eyes of the hunters. More evidence to support this claim? The camera is placed behind the subjects so they run away from us, not towards us. Here's one more:

Great shot, huh? Pretty claustrophobic, right? These shots combined create a great sense of paranoia. In this way, the subject of the film becomes not alien invaders scaring us, but the fear itself. The film is about being afraid. There’s more ofthese shots, but I don’t want to ruin the movie for you.

So here’s a question: Can you think of a film where the framing is used to create a similar sense of claustrophobia and paranoia? Or, can you think of examples of just the opposite, films in which the framing creates a sense of freedom and openness?