'Gasman'

‘Gasman’ was directed by Lynne Ramsay and produced by Gavin Emerson in 1997. The film has won awards such as a Cannes Grand Prix Du Jury award and a Scottish BAFTA for best short. Since ‘Gasman’, Ramsay has gone on to make feature films ‘Ratcatcher’ and ‘Morvern Killer’, which, again, won her numerous awards while boosting her reputation as a director. ‘Gasman’ is about a father harbouring a secret which his children are clearly unaware of. This results in the children sparking a rivalry against each other for his attention. Also, the film raises many themes and issues, which are debateable due to the overall ambiguity of the narrative and characters, such as neglect, child rivalry, jealousy, responsibility, economic struggle and (possibly) intoxication.

When the film starts, there are many extreme close-up shots of the human anatomy, for example, arms and shoulders. This is a strategic move by the director because she didn’t want the audience to immediately see the main character which would intrigue them and make them want to see. Despite this, the extreme close-ups are indicative of how the main character is about to be revealed which adds to the film language. These shots also convey a sense of mystery which will engross the audience even further.

In addition, there is another extreme close-up shot of a boy playing with a car; however, he is vigorously scraping it against the table which is holistically uncomfortable for the audience to listen to. This juxtaposes with the cheerful, diegetic Christmas music playing in the background. In relation, the boy sprinkles salt into the car and this links to the well known phrase “white Christmas”, which carries joyful and positive connotations and he isn’t going to get that. The boy’s possible isolation and negative attitude because Christmas is known as an extremely happy time for families but the sound of the salt hitting the toy car abruptly drowns the music out.

Moreover, there is intertextuality in the shot with the girl with her black shoes because the choreography is an exact replica from ‘The Wizard of Oz’ and I think it shows her loss of innocence and vulnerability as a child. She reinacts the classic moment with her voice and movement exactly like Dorothy’s (‘The Wizard of Oz’). Also, the mise-en-scene is definitely symbolic as the black shoes are very similar to Dorothy’s red shoes. However, the fact they are black shows a low status. A following low angle shot of the suit hanging up on the wardrobe establishes a higher status and as the suit belongs to a man, the audience are able to guess it’s the father’s. The soft plastic around the suit is indicative of a concealed identity which shows there is more to him.

The opening overall is very generic and represents a typical 20th Century family with the children bored at home, a father getting ready while the mother helps, therefore, they take on traditional gender roles. We know its set during the 70’s in Glasgow because of the diegetic music playing and the dialect and dialogue spoken by the characters. The lighting is very dull because of its grey, bluish colour and slightly grainy texture. This makes the house appear slightly dilapidated which allows the issue of economic struggle to surface. The colour causes many adjectives to spring to mind like dull, harsh and dark. Each of these has negative connotations.
The diegetic sounds within different shots communicate the family’s struggle. For example, the father’s smoking and drinking (although we’re not sure of exactly what he’s drinking) not only gives away his nerves but the exhalation emphasises his inner turmoil which gives room for interpretation because some could argue the inner turmoil is a result of the fact he has two separate families to provide for or it could be due to the apparent economic strife they’re suffering. The father’s voice is droning and slow paced which conveys a possible low self esteem and depression.
The shot of the mother looking out of the window as her family leave for the Christmas party is foreshadowing of the plot because of her character codes. For example, her placid and subdued facial expression indicates something significant will eventually happen. After this, there is a wide shot which is quite bleak and misplaced in a sense. Also, the boy is separate from the girl and father which makes us contemplate whether he is more mature and clued up about his father’s alternate family.

The wide shot where the family are seen as silhouettes is very ironic because it gives a family portrait effect making them seem like a typical happy family yet previous scenes show they’re far from it. The slow tracking shot of them walking on the tracks is very significant because the disused tracks are infinite and give a sense of hopelessness as it seems like it goes on forever. The dysfunctional-like railway tracks could also metaphorically represent the muddled and mixed family as adultery is a predominant theme and there have been hints of the father’s infidelity throughout.

When we meet the other family, we can see they’re also economically challenged through the mise-en-scene because the children are dressed in what looks like school uniform, and it’ slightly dirty. Furthermore, we immediately gain a sense of child conflict because one girl is making snide comments about the girl from the other family. Her brother makes the comment “she looks like you” which subtly communicates to the audience that they’re all related to each other, reinforcing the presumption about adultery. The teasing which takes place between the children is like sibling rivalry and the two girls even have similar headbands. The applied 180 degree rule along with the shot reverse shot between the two adults show intimacy and the closeness shows how they’re in their own little world. In spite of this, the phatic communication which takes place between them contradicts this and shows they’re being civil primarily for the kids and they don’t really know what to say to each other. This shows how complicated the family are.

When they arrive at the dilapidated pub where the party is being held, the father holds the door open for girls but allows it to shut on the boy which allows the theme of resentment to rise to prominence as there is clearly a lack of respect between them. The slow panning of the room indicates how bored the girl is because it’s from her point of view. The theme of boredom is accentuated by the fact all the other children in the room appear to be having fun and enjoying themselves. Following this, there is a wide shot which emphasises her isolation and alienation from everyone else. The immediate swift editorial pace after this conveys how there is complete chaos in the room.

In addition, the handheld camera effect communicates vulnerability or possible intoxication depending on whose point of view this particular point is from. There are a frequent amount of jump cuts which show a loss of consciousness, sustaining the possible theme of intoxication. The father might be portrayed as being selfish at this point for leaving the children to play on their own which, again, raises the theme of child neglect. Eventually the two girls fight for a place on their father’s lap as a result of jealously and resentment. The father attempts to comfort both of his daughters, showing he is caring which could contradict the argument for him being selfish.

On the way home from the party, the father has to comfort both girls a second time after they fight over who gets to hold his hand. The family portrait effect is present again due to the mise-en-scene of the streetlights, when the “other” family go back to their mother (without the mother and father sharing small talk this time around) the girl picks up a stone, which because of the previous moment with he boy throwing the stone at his father, has become symbolism for hatred. She drops the stone before sighing and they begin to make their way home. Finally, it’s worth noting the structure of the film follows Aristotle’s 3 acts theory.