When the filmThe Usual Suspectswas released in 1995 nobody knew it would eventually be rated as one of the best films of all time.1The appeal of the film lies within its cleverly structured narrative and its unique way of making the viewer want to watch the film again in a different light.The Usual Suspectsis one of those films you have to watch at least twice to get close to the truth of what is being told. During the second watching you will ask yourself if you are really seeing the same film and the same character, because you were sure that Verbal Kint seemed incredibly harmless the first time around while he comes across very differently the second time. That is the question that shall be examined in the course of this paper in which I want to analyse how Bryan Singer, the film's director, achieved his aim of creating a completely innocent character in the course of the film, only to let the audience find out that Kint might be the criminal mastermind behind the whole scheme. How do the film-makers achieve the portrayal of the harmless Kint, and how does he come across in the second watching? By choosingThe Usual Suspects,this paper also serves as an example of how audiences can be manipulated. Therefore, I will also have a look at the role and the behaviour of an audience.
First of all, we will concern ourselves with a film theory developed by Kracauer examining the role of an audience and the effects films might have on it. We will analyse how audiences feel and behave during the experience of a film screening and how their minds function at the time. Secondly, I will shortly introduce the filmThe Usual Suspectswith its most important characters and its plot, before I, thirdly, want to go into the analysis of the creation of Verbal Kint's character, and scrutinise how Singer worked with narrative and technical means to leave behind a puzzled audience. To achieve that, I will pick a few scenes from the film and analyse them in respect to their filmic realisation.
I hope that this paper will thoroughly answer the question of how an audience let themselves be manipulated by a feature film and what effects certain filmic means can achieve if properly deployed. Towards the end, all the gathered information will shortly be summarised and a conclusion will be expressed.
At a glance
- Grade: 2.0 (1.0 is the best grade)
- Applies Siegfried Kracauer’s film theory to the audience’s role
- Analyzes selected scenes for their cinematic realization
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 The Audience in Film Theories
2.1 Behaviour and Attitude towards Films in General
2.2 Manipulable Audience?
3 Background Information about The Usual Suspects
3.1 Character Constellation
3.2 Plot Summary
4 The Portrayal of Verbal Kint
4.1 Narrative Means to Create Kint's Innocence
4.2 Technical Means to Create Kint's Innocence
4.3 Hints to the truth
5 Conclusion
Objectives and Themes
This paper examines how the filmmakers of The Usual Suspects portray Verbal Kint as an apparently innocent character and use that portrayal to shape the audience’s response to the film’s ending. It asks how narrative and technical choices influence viewers’ perceptions, drawing on Siegfried Kracauer’s account of film spectatorship.
- Film spectatorship and audience identification
- Kracauer’s theory of film and manipulation
- Character relationships and the film’s plot
- Verbal Kint’s narration and apparent innocence
- Camera techniques and visual perspective
- Clues that invite a second viewing
Excerpt from the Book
Behaviour and Attitude towards Films in General
First of all, I want to present a view on the role of an audience in film theories and examine the effects that a film might have on a viewer. Siegfried Kracauer portrays the audience in his book Theorie des Films and that depiction shall serve as a basis for this paper. Since Kracauer wrote this book when televison sets were not as spread as they are today, we will concentrate on the experience that viewers made in cinemas. Kracauer mostly analysed silent films, but has also lived through the development of talkies. Some critics argued that his theory cannot be applied to non-silent films, because sound and speech give a film a hint of reality which makes the audience aware of the fictional character of what they are watching. Kracauer, however, dismissed that critique himself. Whether a film is silent or not, from a really filmish film one can expect it to influence the audience in a way that is not comparable to different media (Kracauer 215).
According to Kracauer, the audience is compulsively attracted to the moving image, because it addresses several human senses. That fact generates an accumulation of shocklike emotions in which the audience is absorbed. In the same breath, the viewers identify with the images on screen. In the process, they lose their identities for the duration of the film, because they have the impression that, what they are watching is themselves being in the film. It is, as if the images forced the viewer by their mere presence to unreflectingly adapt to the image's indefinable and often amorphous shapes. Accordingly, films tend to weaken the viewer's consciousness supported by the darkness that is surrounding him and taking him even further from reality. Darkness not only cuts him off from reality, but also from environmental circumstances that are necessary for him to pass appropriate judgements. Because of the weakened consciousness, Kracauer compares films to dreams in which audiences relax and soak up every impression. Hence, films tend to rid the viewers of their own emotions and completely absorb them in the experience. People have often compared the medium film to drugs in relation to both their potentials of causing addictions (Kracauer 216 – 218).
All the points mentioned bear a lot of danger if used for manipulative aims, most notably in political contexts. However, people cannot only be manipulated by watching propaganda material, but also by watching feature films. In the next section, we will have a look at the influential capabilities of films on people.
Chapter Summaries
Introduction: Introduces the paper’s questions about Verbal Kint’s portrayal and audience manipulation, and outlines its approach to film theory and scene analysis.
The Audience in Film Theories: Presents Kracauer’s account of spectatorship and considers how identification and weakened critical attention might make audiences susceptible to manipulation.
Background Information about The Usual Suspects: Introduces the principal characters and summarizes the film’s plot and interrogation framework.
The Portrayal of Verbal Kint: Examines narrative and technical techniques used to present Kint as innocent, alongside clues that take on significance when the film is viewed again.
Conclusion: Reflects on the interaction between audience participation, Kint’s portrayal, and the film’s narrative and cinematic techniques.
Keywords
The Usual Suspects, Verbal Kint, Siegfried Kracauer, film theory, audience manipulation, spectatorship, unreliable narration, voice-over, character portrayal, camera perspective, audience identification, twist ending
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this paper about?
It analyzes how The Usual Suspects shapes the audience’s perception of Verbal Kint and prepares the effect of its ending.
What are the central themes?
The paper focuses on spectatorship, audience manipulation, narrative perspective, character portrayal, and cinematic technique.
What is the main research question?
It asks how the filmmakers create an apparently harmless Kint and how his portrayal appears when the film is watched a second time.
What method does the author use?
The author draws on Kracauer’s film theory and analyzes selected scenes in terms of their narrative and cinematic realization.
What does the main analysis cover?
It examines Kint’s voice-over, his relationships with other characters, camera placement, and clues that can be noticed on a repeat viewing.
Which keywords characterize the paper?
Key terms include film spectatorship, audience manipulation, unreliable narration, voice-over, camera perspective, and twist endings.
Why is Kracauer’s theory relevant to the analysis?
His account of audience absorption and identification provides a framework for considering how a film might influence viewers’ judgments.
How does the paper discuss the relationship between Kint and Kujan?
It considers their interrogation as a framework through which Kint tells his story and the audience receives information about the events.
What role does a second viewing play?
The paper considers how details and scenes that appear unremarkable at first can invite different interpretations when watched again.
- Quote paper
- Sarah Rusch (Author), 2006, "The Greatest Trick the Devil Ever Pulled Was Convincing the World He Didn't Exist" - An Analysis of How Film-makers of The Usual Suspects Achieved the Shocking Effect, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/63071
