Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Young Love for the Murder Mysteries

Growing up my mom was always the type that didn’t have the TV on during dinner and would get angry if she caught my brother and I watching MTV or a “scary” television show that may cause us nightmares. My dad, on the other hand, could have cared less what we watched. That was one of my favorite qualities in my dad, his love for murder mysteries and gory movies. Whenever my mom was out my brother would stay up with my dad and watch episode after episode of CSI with our dad, I think that was what sparked my love for the show. When first receiving this assignment the name Jerry Bruckheimer came to mind, I recognized it because it was the first thing you see behind a black screen after the last scene of every episode of CSI. After doing a little research I found out Bruckheimer is also behind every episode of Cold Case. All of these shows are in my top ten, and for obvious reasons. They are extremely alike thanks to their brilliant executive producer. After providing some background on Jerry Bruckheimer and how he got to where he is today, I will address the similarities in his hit television shows: big city detectives working toward solving homicides, and compare camera angles.
Jerry Bruckheimer began his work in show business as an advertisement executive during the 1960’s and 70’s. After meeting Don Simpson, the two began work toward production in forming Simpson-Bruckheimer Productions in 1982. The pair created action/adventure films that were honored with numerous nominations and awards in the film industry world. However, when his partner Simpson died in 1996, Bruckheimer went off on his own toward a successful future in television production. Although he cranked out a few more hit movies on his own in the late nineties, he was working toward a new medium and had a genre in mind and began working on CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (2000) for CBS. When CSI became a hit he began production on CSI: Miami (2002), a spin-off taken place in Miami instead of Las Vegas. His next his show, Cold Case (2003), is set in Philadelphia and based on a homicide detective who focuses on reopening unsolved murder cases. A third CSI came along within the next years (2004) based in New York City.
It is obviously going to be the easiest to spot comparisons within the original CSI and its spin-off’s since they are basically the same show just set in different cities. The thematical motif of the show is the solving of a new murder each episode, as well as glamorization of being a CSI. Cold Case uses a recurring theme as well, but reopens cases instead of new murders. It makes detective work seem more alluring than everyday work really is. Bruckheimer begins each episode of CSI by giving the viewer a look at the crime-scene and person who got murdered using an establishing shot (a long shot that positions characters within their environments). The camera usually scans the room or area the murder took place with an extreme long shot (the human form is small and point of view is distant) so that you can take in the scene as a whole before the detectives begin to pick apart the crime scene. When the CSI’s show up, the framing switches to medium close up’s (showing half of the actor and showing more body language but not in specific detail) going between the actor/actress and what they are finding on the victim. This technique uses lots of pedestaling (vertical raising and lowering of the camera) between the actor and findings. After the head detective dramatically announces the findings of something substantial, the show shoots into the opening credits. This is a catchy song beginning with an aerial shot of the city in which the show takes place, followed by medium close up’s on each main character in a work scenario.
Cold Case’s main introduction is similar to the CSI’s in a few ways. It actually starts out with a mosaic of different pictures that deal with case solving and digging up old evidence. When showing each main character the camera uses close up’s on the faces and quickly flashes the actor/actresses name. The opening song is pretty dramatic as well, but is wordless and not as common as the pieces chosen for the CSI’s. Majority of Cold Case’s scenes take place in a questioning room where the detectives bring in numerous suspects looking desperately for answers. The crime scene investigators in CSI use the same tactics and much of the camera work during the questioning is alike, along with the actual rooms themselves. Bruckheimer’s similar camera framing in these shows makes his production work easy to spot.
Although Bruckheimer’s main television shows are all extremely alike, they are all hits with CBS and keep getting promoted to additional seasons. All shows have a story line and character interaction that carries on with episodes and seasons, but can still be enjoyed if you have no background information on the show or its characters. The trend in television has been murder mysteries for awhile now, and it seems to still be holding onto viewers. Bruckheimer’s success in this field is leading the charts due to his clever thematical motifs of mysteries and detective work.

References

Gordon, Kristina. Lecture. 8 Oct. 2009.
The Internet Movie Database. 19 Oct. 1990. 5 Oct. 2009 .

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Clever Critiques?

As a critic in this day and age, I will admit to having a biased opinion on how I evaluate television. I am by no means one interested in high cultured television (smart or educational TV as I like to call it). I pride myself on the amount of reality garbage, celebrity news, and soap opera junk I take in weekly. That being said, I do enjoy analyzing and interpreting what is television, and how we compare it to our everyday lives. In attempts to decipher why the producer chose those words, or characters, I will convey my ideas. My goal is to persuade you that, although what I watch may semi-mindless, I appreciate and hope to deliver good criticism. Hopefully by the end of this piece you will know whether to go to E! or TMZ for “who’s who” this week in Hollywood.

Though I do think my way indeed is the “highway,” I know this is not the case. As a critic I expect my readers to know I look at television through a different looking glass. I will relay my messages through persuasion; I know criticism is extremely subjective. As O’Donnell (2007) states, we bring our life experiences, our beliefs, attitudes and values [to the show]. Both the critic and the audience bring pieces of themselves into the piece. For example, I know The O.C. is not the best show: not the best acting or staging. However, I fell in love with the main character Seth Cohen, and the overly dramatic scenarios. I watched all of the four seasons, and will probably watch them again once my obsession begins to subside. I would support the show for other reasons than some may thing reasons for a show being worthwhile. Everything is put on the television for a reason. As a critic it is our job to determine why, and pick out the good and bad that is revealed.

Polysemy is another aspect of television that can help open up a critic and audience’s stance on a specific show. A viewer may initially judge a television program as inappropriate or demeaning based upon its title. As a critic it is my job to pull out the good (or bad) of the show and illustrate why not to judge it just because of one view. “A segment of the televisual flow, whether it be an individual program, a commercial, a newscast, or an entire evening’s viewing, ma be thought of as a televisual text – offering a multiplicity of meanings or polysemy” Butler, J. (2002).

Due to the types of television I watch, I will have to focus hard on creating my critical argument, which is a statement with the reasoning that justifies thinking that the statement is true, Sillars, M. O. and Gronbeck, B. E. (2001). I could ramble on for days as to why CSI: New York is the best of all the CSI’s, but without a “because clause” my thoughts will come off just as any other random opinion. This brings out why it is so important to pick apart and study the differences in television shows. I will create as much justification toward my clause that is necessary in order to prove to the audience that my review is credible. CSI: Las Vegas is good because it is the original, BUT CSI: New York attracts a different and larger audience as touches on more current and realistic issues.

As I am still trying to find and distinguish myself as a critic, I accept any and all feedback. I am still attempting to decipher many of the views I touched on myself, so other clarity on the topics would be great. I do spend majority of my television time watching non-educational brain wasters (besides Shark Week on Discovery). I would though like to hear about some interesting “thinker” shows. I know and understand how it is extremely easy to disagree with the views I have on television, so don’t hold back!
References
Butler, J. (2002). Television: Critical Methods and Applications (2nd ed). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
O’Donnell, V. (2007). Television Criticism. New York: Sage.
Sillars, M. O. and Gronbeck, B. E. (2001). Communication Criticism: Rhetoric, Social Codes, Cultural Studies. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.