TWE does an ideological analysis change/explain our response to the narrative exposition?
Doesn’t change our response but makes the sympathy more interesting. Explains our response to equilibrium, complicates reaction to disruption.
In our initial response, we don’t need an ideological lens to identify the community as working class. The indicators aren’t so much symbolic but a rather obvious portrayal of a working-class community. The nostalgia adds to the victims’ innocence evoking sympathy, evidence:
* Sound- Ma calling for Buddy for tea vs in the riot [existence of family- extends to working class neighbourhood- and domesticity within both binary oppositions peace and war] / Overlapping dialogue vs unintelligible diegetic shouting of the mob with the voices of Buddy’s neighbours clearly heard [disruption of equilibrium, protestant sympathy working class protestants, terror, one-sided violence, Buddy can’t understand the mob’s reasoning so they’re unintelligible, innocence highlighted, sides don’t matter]
* Cinematography- overhead shots and ELSs of the docks / MCU of Titanic Museum sign, regular thirds [shows us Modern working-class Belfast the new equilibrium first= reassuring, scale, importance of not forgetting history, national identity] / Pans in over a mural of dock workers [working-class identity, interconnection between art and politics, walled in- separation between working class and the rest of the world] / Jump cut to MCU of mural man [eye contact = confront the role (privilege)/hardships of our countries considering progression of national identities] / Long tracking shots in 1969 Belfast [romanticised non-politicised peace, equilibrium, working class setting] / 360° shot of Buddy [focus on the response of the innocent child rather than mob] / Handheld camera when violence starts [shakey, disruption of equilibrium]
* MES- Buddy wearing polo top and trousers [smart, appearance similar to street, well-kept but not extravagant, unpreparedness] / Ma wearing a top, knee length skirt and heels [contrast to the violence] / Ma’s hair is pinned up and gets looser as the violence breaks out [appearance vs reality] / Bin lid [fantasy vs reality, actually protects them, strong indicator of class, normal undeserving] / The raspiness of Ma calling out for Buddy in the attack [terror vs safety] / Painted goal posts and terrace housing, no buffer between the street [a proximity in working class communities- help each other out- vulnerable]
IDEOLOGY helps us understand NARRATIVE in terms of understanding Branagh’s appreciation for working-class strength and acknowledgement that sides don’t matter, in civil war, the innocent and helpless, within the working-class, always suffer.
(TWE does an ideological analysis change/explain our response to the narrative exposition?)
Examples of Binary Oppositions + Character
Peace vs Violence: Can clearly see peace in working class setting but ideology helps us understand placement of disruption of equilibrium as the film detail working-class suffering and struggles.
Fantasy vs Reality: Highlights the danger so we sympathise and shows us the film through Buddy’s eyes highlighting the significance
Terror vs Safety: Similar to peace vs violence
Appearance vs Reality: unseen struggles links to class
Character: Buddy- understanding the significance of his innocence
TWE does an ideological analysis change/explain our response to the narrative RESOLUTION?
Initial response is shaped by the sense of immediate danger corrupting childhood innocence, evidence and the ideological lens offers a couple of dual interpretations that defend Billy but nothing hugely significant as we recognise the oppositions so obviously that represent the decent of working-class community:
* Sound- Overwhelming military noise with Clanton’s shouting cutting through “You try to run, I’ll put a bullet in your son’s head”/ Ma’s scared breathing [intense fear in opposition to safety family should provide and working-class community] / “Oh here he comes, the lone ranger” [framing as a memory from Buddy’s pov, highlights innocence, good vs evil, fantasy vs reality] + Van Morrison song [Western vibes]
* Cinematography- Tracking shots of military [decent of working-class neighbourhood, institution vs people] + pan from tank to lone rioter / CU on gun [highlight danger] / OTS LS of dad [Western analysis] / MCU Ma, Buddy, Clanton then CU on gun [Western showdown- application of class= equals suffering from their society] / Eye-level with Buddy pans up during hug [His perspective- western analysis] / HAS Moira in the centre of the military [innocence vs danger, should we then have the capacity to forgive Clanton?]
* MES- Military uniform vs ordinary clothes, Clanton and Pa dress alike [application of class= working-class victims suffering alike] / Gun / Fear / Street as a set, which we get the overhead shot of [decent of working-class community spirit]
TWE does an ideological analysis change/explain our response to the film?
Same analysis as previous question
Overall, the film is so clearly about the decent of working-class communities in civil war, a class lens can offer us so little apart from adding to our understanding of Branagh’s appreciation and the equal suffering of both ‘sides’.
How does the narrative feature shape our response to a specific character?
Opening/disruption of equilibrium- Pity as Buddy is entirely innocent demonstrating the message
Resolution- Pa as a hero, we’re inclined to forget his absence / Billy Clanton as the villain representing the consequence/conflict of the Troubles that pushes them out of Belfast
How does technical detail shape response to character/narrative?
Same analysis as Q1- use initial responses
