The Screen Theory  

The Screen Theory  

Introduction

The screen theory is developed diagrammatically to enable free interpretation of the meaning of numerous sections. Ideally, a diagram can elaborately be specific, not rigid on the interpretation and application. The main aim is not to come up with a theory of every item that tries to build a common area of presuppositions. Instead, it should be ideal for establishing a working space that allows intercomparison to a larger scale (Constable, 487). Analogy, systems of substitution, and comparison are regarded as the most useful. However, the demand for a more structural design that is specific in nature fore open flow of strategies and topics in different limits of culture, historical periods, and media. Three main ideas can, therefore, help in the interpretation of Carol. These central ideas from semiotics that explains the connection metonymy and metaphor to allow generation of new meanings from the preceding sections. Secondly, the notion from film criticism the “future” and the idea from popular culture theory that explains the objects being invested through shifts in the point of view symbolically.

The Idea of Suture

The idea of suture can be defined as an abrupt practice of the cartesian assumption about the time and space viewed as linear, homogenous, and extended infinity. The seam can also be the outward fear over which precautions are undertaken and eventually becomes interior.  A Suture is usually used to portray the position of the psyche of reality to real and illustration of how often and carelessly the rule of truth is violated. Stitching is, therefore, a more accurate architectural idea. Additionally, sutures become common thorough scale inversion tricks where essential things can be used as small things and vise Versa.

The Idea from Semiotic

Arguably, culture starts at the point when the man is capable of seeing the continuation of nature in the form of discrete collective sections, each a capacity of its existence and function. Whereby there is a collection of namable colors from the color spectrum. Ideological categories of exposure are used mainly to portray use, character, and relationships metaphorically.  An independent function can convey invisible and abstract ideas once there is opposition. Metaphors such as pictures are made in frames focusing on specific elements as some elements are excluded. Metonymy participates in designing the metaphors and can as well act as a metaphor. Metonymy generates signification chains extending to numerous directions. The screen can use both metonymy and metaphor to design time and space around appearance hence becoming useful the architecture criticism. Metonymy works with the material nature of the sign and the capability to show numerous meanings, generate new meaning, and create the ambiguity.

The Idea of the Popular Culture

The architecture and post theories coexistence depend on the technology of relevance centering on signification and human use. Portioning of theoretical questions can not be ideological if the necessary order of discourse is not violated. Acting like populism, in the sense of similarity. Besides landscapes and literal buildings, popular culture offers many more ideas. Photographs, films, and paintings that encapsulate and frame the reliable worlds and coat them to the world of wishes and dreams.

Analysis Using the Idea of the Popular Culture

Concerning Carol, there exists the artifice seen in the glacial of Carol. The performance communicates control of tensile, a shaky, a shivering precision with emotions aiming to come out on the surface of etiquette, behavior, and skin surface. While the subcutaneous shiver does not come from the performance of the actor but the performance of Haynes capture through the application of images of Lachman’s grainy (Constable, 486). The frissons are not affecting the skin of the actor, but the appearance on the next film stock skin lending immorality of the actor a shivering illusion. Carol appears with light skin with architectural and textual sensuality in both fabric and clothing. Carol bares hands squeezed, no a clothed shoulder, glances futile, gazes ardent, and space shape that complete the desire. In the movie, Carol is seen with a delight skin not reflecting romance bur. Instead, a consequence consistently subordinates to form, light, stuff, and color. The film grain in the movie freshly melts into the fire to unite fabric, skin, shadow, and light into churning passion. These self-dissolving images, abstracted and misty, appears to be less a metaphor for the state of mind of the character than Haynes’s vision of ecstasy and agony (Westwell, 495).

Furthermore, the swirling blend of colors internally within the image that is a range of vibrations in motion is impacted by the elements in picture form of composition by Haynes that offer identity to the structures. The film shows a shrouded view of the actors as is viewed through the car glass windows and spattered window apartments, baring raindrops, reflected by streetlights and sky glare. The intricate tricks of routine optics hide the actors while their outward view is blocked. Two women in the Carol image are wrapped within the center in a visual cocoon, forcing them tightly together as they are distinguished from the others. The grain used in Carol is important due because Lachman and Haynes fix 16mm stocked film to reflect the range of expressions that seems impossible. The film viewing is seen as a specialized experience more so according to the kind of concentration of the central dramatic characters in the performance and image composition.

Lachman recognizes the elements of thrilling camera movements majestically, especially when the camera goes after a car in motion before going high overhead as the car moves forward into the landscape (Westwell, 494). The situation when the actor and the camera do not move, but the images are sorted by movements internally through cinematic thoughts and editing that they represent. At the scenes, Therese and Carol rarely face one another on a table; neither do they glance at each other. This much romantic ardor coming out at these stages shows a significant item in film theory. However, it is frequently overlooked by critics and directors. The expensive pattern of reverse and a shot of crossing between the characters looking and talking at each other does not automatically become easy convenience to ensure scene dialogue coverage but is likely to be a tricky composition devise as exacting and expressive as a comprehensive long take.

Conclusion

Haynes paints the sublimity of ordinary. The level of greatness thrust by Therese and Carol is resulting at a cost; the fight for happiness is worth fear ostracism and prosecution. The political meaning of Carol means there is no need to take a more significant attitude or pursuing romance between two men than it would make the heterosexual couple in the same situation. The film director embraces ecstasy in performance and images that the viewer is shown more on his romantic fantasies and desires than the characters