“Birdman,” the comedy-drama starring Michael Keaton as washed-up ex-superhero actor Riggin Thomas, signals a new criterion of filmmaking.
Director Alejandro González Iñárritu has thrown out everything you learn in film school with his latest film. What is revolutionary is his decision to shoot the entire film in one, extremely long take.
Of course, it’s not actually one take — that would require the entire film to be shot at one time — but to the layman’s eye it is nearly impossible to see any cuts.
A cut is a visual transition created in editing in which one shot is instantaneously replaced on screen by another. Typically, viewers don’t even realize a cut is happening when it’s happening, but you can tell when it’s not there. This is the case in “Birdman.”
I’ve never seen a film shot this way. Most directors working today aren’t crazy enough to even try something like this.
The absence of noticeable cuts in “Birdman” brings a sense of urgency to the action, like we’re right there, experiencing the events in the film like a character would be.
Characters in a film don’t see the cuts that the audience sees, so when the audience can’t see the cuts either, it makes us feel like we, too, are characters in the film. It partially breaks down the wall between the film and the audience.
It’s kind of like a video game. Excluding cut scenes, when you play a video game you control the action of the character from the character’s perspective, and there aren’t any cuts in the action. There are no breaks or transitions between one image and another.
“Birdman” replicates this. It is an engrossing experience of hyperrealism that’s ironic because much of the film is very unrealistic, namely, the second shot of the film that shows Riggan levitating in midair.
I would like to say that we’re heading toward this direction of the one long take in cinema, and the 100+ cuts that we see in most films are going to the wayside.
But, sadly, this isn’t the case. Most films made today have dozens, even hundreds more cuts than films had 50 or even 25 years ago.
This is especially the case in action and comedy films. These are both genres that rely heavily on the cut. In the case of action, using lots of cuts gives the appearance that the action is happening quickly. In the case of comedy, cuts assist in showing irony and are particularly useful in physical humor.
I think a big reason films have more cuts than they used to is because the audience’s attention span is shorter than it used to be. And like I said before, cuts give the appearance that the action is happening faster. We get bored looking at the same image for very long.
So “Birdman” is refreshing, as well as revolutionary. Everything about it was engaging, but it’s worth seeing if only for its appearance of one long take.
Next time you watch a movie try to look for the cuts, excluding “Birdman,” of course. I think you’ll be surprised at just how many you will see.
zipperr@indiana.edu
