Mise-En-Scène is one of the most important elements in cinematography, setting the tone of a scene through a variety of spacing, lighting, props, and more. In Chapter Four of David Bordwell’s Film Art: an Introduction he places key set design decisions in the context of some of the most critically acclaimed movies in history, articulating the lengths to which directors will go to manipulate a scene and change viewers’ perception of a character or idea.
So what elements go into the Mise-en-scene of a film? Lighting, above all, plays a critical role in directing the space within a scene and dramatizing the setting or objects of the scene. Lighting can be used to set the time of day—emphasizing the layers of light within a scene (high-key lighting) or even setting a sad, scary, or mysterious tone using dark lights and shadows (low-key lighting). For example, In Back to the Future (1985) high-key lighting is often used to express the contrast between night and day.
Similarly, Bordwell examines the importance of background and spacing in film. Filmmakers pay careful attention to spacing when curating the screen, keeping the halves of the screen balanced throughout most shots and mitigating distraction during the scene by focusing on specific people or objects. The background of a scene introduces its three-dimensionality and the variation of color and perspective introduces the viewer to the setting without showing the entire space.
What most struck me was that a large segment of the chapter focused on the importance of eyes. In Charlie Chaplin’s City Lights (1931), the viewer has to infer that Virginia Cherrell has gotten surgery to repair her vision simply by reacting to the lit-up eyes of her lover Charlie Chaplin, who stares at her in awe during the scene. Bordwell discusses the great lengths that actors have to go to produce film-worthy shots, holding eye contact for long periods while rarely blinking, for any movement could change the scene’s tone or cause the viewer to consider the actors not present. Something as simple as one’s eyes can define one’s personality, making them appear more concentrated, happy, or discontent—all from the way that they are squinting their eyes and adjusting their eyebrows. Additionally, by adding small details like eyeliner in a scene, the director can heighten where the actor is looking and emphasize the reflective state of the scene.
While there are many elements that comprise the Mise-En-Scène of a film, the most important one varies depending on the director’s style and the message they are trying to get across to the viewer. The reading led me to question what is more important, the orientation of the actors, or the lighting cast upon them in a scene?
I believe that although both lighting and actors are vital to a scene and to the overall story, the orientation of the actors is more important than the lighting. Without the correct orientation of the actors, the lighting cannot properly do its job. How an actor performs a scene can vastly change the meaning that most viewers will notice. For example, if an actor changes the way they look at a certain object/person in a scene will affect how the audience perceives the actor’s feelings towards the object/person. Regardless of lighting, this goal can be achieved. That being said, lighting can have a similar effect. Different uses of lighting may cause a similar conclusion to be drawn by the audience, but I believe that the actor’s performance would have a greater impact.
It’s difficult to decide which one is more important when both elements are essential to storytelling. It’s crucial for film makers to balance the two in a way that positively advances the film’s storyline.