The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari Q&A

 

1. What is the essential story? 

The movie's plot is that a young man named Francis recalls the horrors that happened to him and his fiance. When attending a fair, he and his friend Alan attended The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, an attraction in which the doctor displayed his somnambulist (sleepwalker) named Cesare. Caligari claims that Cesar can predict the past and present. Alan, curious to know his demise, asks when he will die, to which Cesare responds, "by the break of dawn." Low and beyond, Alan is found dead the following day, being murdered by a mysterious figure. Francis suspects Cesare of being the murderer (and that Dr. Caligari played a part in said murder) and follows them around. Cesare is just about to stab Jane, Francis's fiance but feels she is too pretty to kill and attempts to kidnap her instead. After being chased by Jane's family, he gently puts her down and continues to flee. Cesare dies during his pursuit of freedom, falling off a cliff in the process. Francis and the police then attempt to investigate Dr. Caigari on the matter, considering that his somnambulist tried the crime, but he manages to slip away. Francis spots him entering a madhouse (asylum) and follows him in. To his dismay, he finds that Dr. Calagari is the asylum director. After researching Calagari's personal records and diary, he finds that Dr. Calagari was infatuated with another mystic from the 1700s by the same name and was a serial killer in Italy. The story supposedly ends as Caligari attacks a staff member and is restrained and put into a straitjacket, thus making him an official inmate at his own asylum. However, the audience is then pulled back to the present time, in which Francis is telling the story. Here, we find the truth of who Francis is and all the events that occurred up to that point. Francis attacks the director and accuses him of being Dr. Calamari, and it is then that we realize Francis has been the insane one the whole time. The movie concludes with Dr. Calagari claiming he can now cure Francis since he understands the nature of his condition. 

2. How does the film tell its story? 

The film tells the story through many physical actions, such as Dr. Caligari hobbling up the stairs in his first scene. Right off the bat, we can tell this man is our antagonist, and he has yet to say a word. But his dark colors, mysterious presence, and sense of abnormality in his actions set him apart from his environment. Facial expressions are also a huge factor in creating these movies; as the characters never outright say, “I’m scared!” they rely on their face. This holds true for films now too, but it was even harder to convey their emotions without the support of verbal dialog. 

3. What conventions of storytelling does it use? 

The story focuses on only a handful of characters. There is a straightforward plot (minus the twist ending), and there are no subplots either. Usually, movies have something else going on other than the main plot, such as a love interest or a personal issue. This doesn’t seem to be the case in The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. Perhaps they didn’t have time to hire extra actors and create different storylines or were running low on funds. Whatever the reason, they did not include this in their film. They did, however, rely heavily on theme and environment. While incredibly cliche, I would argue that this film has the theme of “everything is not what it seems,” which could apply to every movie, but this was also one of the first films of its kind. 

4. Explain the final "plot twist"

The final plot twist is that everything was Francis’s delusion, and none of it actually happened. It was all in his head. In reality, Francis, along with Jane and Cesare, are inmates at an insane asylum, and the man he refers to as “Dr. Caligari” is the director of the said asylum. 

5. How does the final plot twist comment upon cinematic storytelling? 

Cinematic storytelling wasn’t as advanced as it is now, but it shows that even back then, they knew how to keep an audience on the edge of their seats. During the period in which this was made, I’m sure it made for a terrifying sequence of events and a huge shocker when the plot twist was revealed. Nowadays, plot twists such as those are almost expected, so when they happen, it doesn’t have as much of an impact as they might’ve had back then. 

6. What do the set designs say about early filmmaking? 

The early sets show that there clearly weren't as many technological advances as there are today. The cuts in-between scenes where the setting was shown were hand drawn rather than done through a computer. Also, for some reason, they tended to close out a scene by focusing on one of the characters' faces and cutting to a black screen or a screen with text on it. It felt like it could have been smoother and more relaxed at specific points. However, there was a warning at the beginning of the movie that this film did not follow a linear sequence as what we might be used to now. 

7. What do the set designs imply about stories and storytelling? 

The environment and drawings are surreal and demonstrate to the viewer that this world is unlike others we might be used to. The film's opening shot, where you see this mountain of houses, looks very cartoon-like and not a realistic place for anyone to reside in. This is red flag #1 that something might be off here. The environment is wildly exaggerated and irregular, adding to the feeling of a dystopian world. 

8. How do the answers to questions 6 and 7 move us to contemplate the cultural relevance of this film? 

The fact that there is a castle on top of a hill and the rest of the “common folk” are beneath it lends itself to the idea of a hierarchy and the oppression of ordinary folk by those who are wealthy and in charge. Another example of this is the interaction between Dr. Caligari and the clerk. The clerk appears to be on an abnormally large chair and is preoccupied with something. This hints at the idea of superiority as he laughs in the face of Dr. Caligari as if he were a peasant or less than him. 

9. If you had to think about a more modern, 20th-century film with traces to Caligari, what would they be? Why? 

This is a good question, and I’m not quite sure how to answer that. If you were asking if I were to make a movie in the 20s, what ideas or constructs would I include in my film? I’m not sure. I’ve never considered myself to be a creative person, but maybe a monster film? Again, not quite sure how to answer this question. If you are talking about the 21st century (current time period) and what movies I can infer may have been semi-inspired by this film, that is an entirely different question. This movie gave me Tim Burton vibes since many of his films tend to have eerie fantastical backgrounds and plotlines. Additionally, the character Cesare reminded me of Victor from Burton’s “The Corpse Bride.” Both have intricate and fantasy-like scenes with abnormal proportions and exaggerated features. There is also the element of murder and the “who did it?” vibe. The actual set design, however, feels very reminiscent of the film “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” because the size reference seems to change frequently to administer a feeling of hierarchy or power during the early 20. 

10. How do the questions about the reliability of the narrator suggest meanings, cultural relevance, and the nature of the film? 

I feel like after learning that Francis is “crazy,” we, as the audience, are expected to believe everything that he says is not credible and just gibberish. I think it makes the mentally ill out to be these freaks of nature who can’t distinguish between reality and fiction. To be fair, that was the view on mental illness back in those days. But, I feel like it perpetuated the culture and stereotype that people who are mentally ill cannot function in everyday society, completely disregarding the hints at social hierarchy and unfairness Francis has hinted at throughout the movie. 

The Spoken Words That Caused A Sensation In "The Jazz Singer" (1927).

While reading "A Brief History of Cinema," I stumbled across a clip that I found very intriguing. The clip above is the first time sound and image synced together. Of course, that seems obvious to us now in 2023, but those were unheard of back in 1904. Sam Warner was the genius behind the idea and 1/2 of the Warner Brothers Co, one of the world's most successful and largest film-making industries. Nobody believed him, naturally. If someone approached me with something I had previously thought impossible, I would feel the same way.

Nevertheless, Sam persisted, and soon enough, he would plead for the funds to eventually fuel this dream that he would quickly make a reality. On October 6th, 1927, "The Jazz Singer" was released, and it was a huge success. Unfortunately, Sam was not there to witness his accomplishments, as he passed the day before the premiere. This clip is monumental and historic because it was the first time someone could have a visual recording of something along with an audio recording. It was like he broke the rules of life. Nobody has ever seen anything like this before. Because of his "discovery/research, he paved the way for thousands of filmmakers after him to make magnificent films and other media.  

Looking at the cinematography from this short clip, I noticed that there weren't a lot of switches in angles, especially in the scene in which the main character "Jakie" is playing the piano for his mother. The camera doesn't shift during their dialog, which would be highly peculiar for a movie nowadays. Directors tend to have the camera facing each person while they speak, getting close shots, long shots, medium shots, etc. I am assuming the reason for the so-called "lack" in cinematography is simply because they didn't discover its effect on the audience. Plus, I'm sure it was much harder to move a camera in the 1930s than now.

What I find particularly fascinating about movies from this era is the amount of physical emotions and body language required to portray an elaborate story before sound with characters, plots, and climaxes, all without the help of sound. That was incredibly impressive looking back. If someone told you to retell a story only using your face and body and a couple of props, could you do it? I couldn't. I think that's also part of the reason why things shifted culturally as well. The use of overexaggerated faces and slapstick comedy wasn't as necessary anymore. Someone didn't have to be hit over the head with a pretend hammer to get a laugh; now, a simple joke could have the same effect.

    Another thing I noted was that I didn't see a single black person in the clips I watched. That isn't exactly a shocker, given the era in which this was filmed. Still, it is unfortunate that the black community was left out of many monumental discoveries and pieces of time, specifically in the film era. Doing a bit more research, I found the main character, "Jakie," played by Al Jolson, did blackface frequently. As unfortunate as that was to discover, one must remember that this was socially acceptable back then, whether it was right or not. We know better now, but seeing someone do something so outwardly offensive is still shocking. Putting that aside, I'm sure watching this film when it first came out was a bombshell for everyone during that period. By this point, anyone alive when the movie came out or starred in the film is long gone. This artifact is a remembrance of a time before modern technology and allows us to see cinematography's great history.  

 

My Welcome Post :)

Hi! My name is Isa, and this is my first official blog post. I am a sophomore at NCC and I am a psychology major. I also love frogs, but I don't own any. I do, however, own three dogs whom I love endlessly. I'm an only child, so it's just me and my parents in the house. I currently live about a 2-minute drive from the Kendall 10 movie theatre in Oswego. I have gone to that theatre quite literally my whole life. I remember seeing "UP" when it first came out with my grandpa. However, it was also my first experience with 3D, so I proceeded to cry and leave haha. I am not particularly stingy with movies or supercritical. However, I can recognize good writing and cinematography when I see it. My favorite genre of film is horror. Only movies after 2000, though. I have yet to find a horror movie made pre-2000s that has scared me (but I'm always looking for a new challenger!). 

Horror movies are so simple yet complex. Many people dismiss horror movies as being nothing but jump scares and monsters. That can be the case for some films, but the good ones are simply masterpieces. A good horror film will keep you so engaged that every jumpscare and every turn leaves you on the edge of your seat. It also lets you root for certain characters and feel immersed in the story as if you are there with them. A REALLY good horror movie will have you sleeping with the lights on at night. I'm not a fan of torture movies, simply because they aren't scary but more disturbing. It makes me more sad and anxious than excited and curious. My favorite subtype of horror would be psychological horror/thrillers. Those films completely mess with your mind, have dramatic twists and turns, and allow for some sense of ease at points. A horror movie that has you paranoid or on edge the whole time starts to lose its appeal since its constant fear throughout. There must be all emotions: sadness, anger, fear, anxiety, etc. An emotional rollercoaster that you enjoy. 

So why am I taking this class? For one, I've always had an interest in film. A good story with a good director can change lives, in all honesty. So many elements come with making a decent film, and they all need to be appreciated equally. I can talk about my favorite films/TV shows for hours. It's all so fascinating to me. I think it's a shame that COVID happened and shut down all the theatres. I feel as though streaming and buying movies at home has become the norm now. This is unfortunate because going to the movie theatre isn't just about seeing the movie; it's the experience. Enough about that though, I'm excited to start sharing my thoughts and reviews about current films!