Ambiguity and Film Criticism: Reasonable Doubt

190 Pages·2021·2.785 MB·English

by  Hoi Lun Law

PALGRAVE CLOSE READINGS
IN FILM AND TELEVISION
Ambiguity and
Film Criticism
Reasonable Doubt
Hoi Lun Law
Palgrave Close Readings in Film and Television
Series Editors
John Gibbs
Department of Film, Theatre & Television
University of Reading
Reading, UK
Doug Pye
Department of Film, Theatre & Television
University of Reading
Reading, UK
Palgrave Close Readings in Film and Television is an innovative series of
research monographs and collections of essays dedicated to extending the
methods and subjects of detailed criticism. Volumes in the series – written
from a variety of standpoints and dealing with diverse topics – are unified
by attentiveness to the material decisions made by filmmakers and a
commitment to develop analysis and reflection from this foundation. Each
volume will be committed to the appreciation of new areas and topics in
the field, but also to strengthening and developing the conceptual basis
and the methodologies of critical analysis itself. The series is based in the
belief that, while a scrupulous attention to the texture of film and television
programmes requires the focus of concept and theory, the discoveries that
such attention produces become vital in questioning and re-f ormulating
theory and concept.
More information about this series at
http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/14712
Hoi Lun Law
Ambiguity and Film
Criticism
Reasonable Doubt
Hoi Lun Law
Bristol, UK
ISSN 2634-6133 ISSN 2634-6141 (electronic)
Palgrave Close Readings in Film and Television
ISBN 978-3-030-62944-1 ISBN 978-3-030-62945-8 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62945-8
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer
Nature Switzerland AG 2021
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of
translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval,
electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now
known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information
in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the
publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to
the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The
publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.
Cover illustration: PictureLux / The Hollywood Archive / Alamy Stock Photo
Cover design: eStudioCalamar
This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Switzerland AG.
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
A
cknowledgements
Looking back at the path I’ve travelled, I appreciate all the help and kind-
ness I encountered along the way. My special thanks go to Alex Clayton,
who has patiently guided me to rediscover and reflect on what I mean by
what I say during my doctoral research. I was told “Alex can teach you
things” before commencing the degree. What I learned over the years
working with him has made this book possible. My ongoing conversations
with Dominic Lash have not only informed the arguments of this volume
but also enriched my understanding of film and film aesthetics. Most
importantly, we share the acquired taste in sour beers! Catherine Grant has
been a great mentor and (later also) a dear friend ever since I came to her
office to discuss film theory in late 2010. Her generosity is legendary. And
surely, I am not the only one who thinks Katie is a magnificent human
being as well as a wonderful educator. Adrian Martin has been extremely
supportive of this project since the early stage. Pointing out a notable
omission in my arguments, his erudite comments helped refine my claims.
Andrew Klevan (who, by the way, made the aforementioned remark about
Alex) gave an unpolished draft of Chap. 2 the kind of sustained critical
engagement (and critique) that I’ve always wanted for my work. Part of
Chap. 6 was presented as a paper at Screen conference 2016 and benefited
from Chris Keathley’s keen eye (in this specific case, ear) for detail. Jacob
Leigh and Kristian Moen were attentive and discerning as the examiners
of my doctoral thesis. Pete Falconer (half-jokingly?) said his role as my
second PhD supervisor was to not get in my way. But I knew very well—
and he made sure of it—that he was available if I ever needed his aid.
v
vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Whenever I talk to James MacDowell, not least about ambiguity, I profit
from his lucidity of thought. Elliott Logan and Murray Pomerance prof-
fered heartfelt words of encouragement when they were most needed,
during that exhilarating yet trying final stretch of writing. I am glad to
have John Gibbs and Doug Pye, who are sympathetic to my critical
approach and temperament, as the series editors of this title. At Palgrave
Macmillan, Emily Wood had provided excellent editorial assistance. It is
my pleasure to be friends with Hanna Kubicka (with whom I enjoyed
many intellectual and not-so-intellectual conservations), Ali Rasooli-Nejad
(whose enthusiasm about “movie masterpieces” is galvanising), and
Jordan Schonig (whose perceptiveness never fails to bring clarity and
rigour to a discussion). Thank you to Lara Perski for being my travel com-
panion throughout this difficult but rewarding path. I will always remem-
ber the time when we had walked such a path and found ourselves “stuck”
on a hilltop. The trail down was steep and narrow, frighteningly treacher-
ous. What to do? We braved the adverse uncertainty together. My greatest
gratitude goes to my parents and my sister, who are always there for me.
This book is for those who are attuned to the teachings of doubt.
c
ontents
1 Introduction: Why Is It as It Is? 1
Part I Pursuits of Reasons 23
2 Difficulty of Reading 25
3 Perplexity of Style 49
4 Depth of Suggestion 87
Part II Drama of Doubt 113
5 Uncertainty of Viewpoint 115
6 Threat of Insignificance 149
7 Concluding Remarks: Reasonable Doubt 175
Index 183
vii
l f
ist of igures
Fig. 2.1 Late Spring (Yasujirō Ozu, 1949) 26
Fig. 2.2 Late Spring (Yasujirō Ozu, 1949) 27
Fig. 2.3 Late Spring (Yasujirō Ozu, 1949) 28
Fig. 2.4 Late Spring (Yasujirō Ozu, 1949) 31
Fig. 3.1 Ten (Abbas Kiarostami, 2002) 61
Fig. 3.2 Ten (Abbas Kiarostami, 2002) 62
Fig. 3.3 Ten (Abbas Kiarostami, 2002) 68
Fig. 3.4 Ten (Abbas Kiarostami, 2002) 76
Fig. 4.1 In a Lonely Place (Nicholas Ray, 1950) 89
Fig. 4.2 In a Lonely Place (Nicholas Ray, 1950) 98
Fig. 4.3 In a Lonely Place (Nicholas Ray, 1950) 100
Fig. 4.4 In a Lonely Place (Nicholas Ray, 1950) 101
Fig. 4.5 In a Lonely Place (Nicholas Ray, 1950) 102
Fig. 4.6 In a Lonely Place (Nicholas Ray, 1950) 103
Fig. 4.7 In a Lonely Place (Nicholas Ray, 1950) 104
Fig. 4.8 In a Lonely Place (Nicholas Ray, 1950) 106
Fig. 5.1 Force Majeure (Ruben Östlund, 2014) 120
Fig. 5.2 Force Majeure (Ruben Östlund, 2014) 124
Fig. 5.3 Force Majeure (Ruben Östlund, 2014) 124
Fig. 5.4 Force Majeure (Ruben Östlund, 2014) 127
Fig. 5.5 Force Majeure (Ruben Östlund, 2014) 133
Fig. 5.6 Force Majeure (Ruben Östlund, 2014) 140
Fig. 6.1 Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (Fritz Lang, 1956) 150
Fig. 6.2 Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (Fritz Lang, 1956) 151
Fig. 6.3 Beyond a Reasonable Doubt (Fritz Lang, 1956) 159
ix
CHAPTER 1
Introduction: Why Is It as It Is?
In spite of its wide currency in film scholarship, criticism, and everyday
conversation, ambiguity has not been systematically developed as an aes-
thetic concept for the medium of film. It has received considerable atten-
tion in discussions of “art cinema” and “modern cinema”, which often
assert the significance of ambiguity in these modes of filmmaking without
unpacking its implications (see Armes 1976; Bordwell 2008; Self 1979).
And when the concept is studied in detail, it is typically in reference to
André Bazin’s phenomenological understanding of cinematic realism (see
Andrew 1973; Carruthers 2017). As a result, there is room in critical lit-
erature for an exploration of ambiguity across diverse film styles. What
would such an account involve? A main task of this book is to offer a useful
framework to appreciate the variegated manifestations of ambiguity
in movies.
What Makes aMbiguity aMbiguous?
Perhaps one reason why ambiguity is understudied, habitually taken for
granted, has to do with its ironically unambiguous standard definition.
Dictionaries define ambiguity as the characteristic of what bears multiple
meanings. This is arguably how the term is ordinarily understood too. The
straightforward definition seems sufficient in itself, not only detailed
enough as a description of what ambiguity entails but also capable of
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature 1
Switzerland AG 2021
H. L. Law, Ambiguity and Film Criticism, Palgrave Close Readings
in Film and Television,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62945-8_1