In ‘real life’ a camera with no eye
There is obviously a time when reasonable presumptions stop to be suitable to this kind of investigation reallifecam voyeur. ‘All things considered’ a camera with no eye at the viewfindei couldn’t film as precisely as does the camera in this scene, yet to protest the film on this premise is overlook the manner by which true to life traditions control the manner by which the group of onlookers peruses this scene.
The regular watcher reacts to this scene, one suspects, similarly as he or she was apparently expected to amateur: vicariously sharing Mark’s involvement of first gathering the clueless Dora and after that watching her fear as she is killed (a dread that appears went for and caused by the eyewitness) — while additionally realizing that Mark is likewise catching this succession of occasions on film. By and by, the logical inconsistency that exists at the diegetic level in this scene (Dora is looking both at the camera and at Matk) is pivotal to the film’s investigation of the experience of voyeurism, for this ‘unimaginable’ bringing together of the inconspicuous carneta and the seen eyes speaks to the inconceivable dream of the voyeur: to watch while covered up and unperceived and in the meantime to be interfaced with, to trade suggest acknowledgment of self with another. Most imperative: this joining of totally unrelated perspectives has a defamiliarising impact upon the crowd, and this, it appears to me, is of good importance.
Up to the last couple of minutes in this scene video amateur voyeur (that is, those following Mark’s getting some distance from Dora and after that turning back as he plays a light all over), Dora unquestionably appears to be ignorant of the camera, with the goal that the impact of the scene is halfway that of making the watcher a covered onlooker of both Mark and Dora, an impact affirmed when we promptly continue to a scene ensuing to the murder in which we are put behind Mark, watching him watch Dora’s anticipated picture on screen. In the meantime, since we realize that nobody inside the film’s diegesis can be seeing, or could see, precisely what we are seeing (Dora and the viewfinder cross) in light of the fact that the viewfinder cross would not be unmistakable when the film is anticipated, there is a solid feeling of arranging in this scene, one buttressed by the criticalness of the soundtrack music, about which more will be said underneath. This is an execution organized us; its stratagem reminds us, makes us aware of the reality, that we are watching a film, not simply as in the film’s diegesis we are watching a procedure of recording, yet more importandy that what we see and hear is being controlled and figuratively coordinated for us video de voyeur.
We are welcome to appreciate being a camera through which nobody is looking, we are welcome to sink into the protected and surrogate dreamland of the film, while having these encounters defamiliarised, deconstructed, exposed. We are welcomed, to put it plainly, to thrive in the impression of being a Peeping Tom while taking a gander at the pitifully unthinkable want of the Peeping Tom. The film gives and the film takes away — however we hold a learning and comprehension of what we have been both allowed and denied of.
