THE INNOCENTS

Film and narrative structure

Narration may be linear, that is it proceeds in chronological order. Within linear structure there are several variations. Some films are in real time – that is to say that the time it takes for the action of the film to happen is equal to the time the film runs (see Rope, High Noon as examples). Other films, while linear, may drop some pieces of time out (a kind of ellipsis). A character may go to be one evening and wake in the next shot 8 hours later. Eight hours have disappeared from real time. If 2001 A Space Odyssey ran in real time we would be in the “Dawn of Man’ segment for several million years more. None the less the film is linear.

Non linear structure occurs when a films narrative flow does not remain chronological. The most common break ion linear structure is probably “the flashback” when the audience is shown something which occurred at an earlier time. Many of the film noir genre are almost totally flashbacks (viz. Sunset Blvd.)

While films like Pulp Fiction may have a kind of circular structure, the reason for such structure is not apparent and may be simply a kind of gimmick. The complex structure of Memento however, which focuses its attention on a man who is unable to form short term memory becomes a test for the audience in how well they can deal with short term memory.

Films also have narration which may be omniscient – that is the audience is told more than any character knows or at the other extreme may be a first person narration so that the audience knows basically no more or less than the character.

One question that needs to be asked regularly is whether or not the images we see on the screen are trustworthy or not. Do they come a narrator who is telling the truth.

The Innocents is a film that parallels The Exorcism of Emily Rose in that both deal with possession and in both cases the supernatural elements are presented as perceived by characters in the film. In Emily Rose, the testimony is the basis for what we see on the screen, where is in The Innocents, the film appears narrated by Miss Giddings. We know from the initial sequence in the film that something has already happened to “the children” and that Ms. Giddings blames herself saying “I never meant to hurt the children”.. The entire film is virtually a flashback in which Miss Giddens tells (or perhaps “relives”) the events that happened.

In the “emic-etic” theory put forth by linguist Kenneth Pike, an event (an “etic”) may be perceived (the “emic”) by different people differently. In Emily Rose, the medical professionals operate within a single emic which may be described as “rationalism” whereas the religious community operates in a realm which may be seen as anti-rationalist (rather than “irrationalist”). Rationalism is seen as the “dominant” position (or as post modernists like to say “privileged position”). Emily Rose argues in a sense that both positions may be equally valid.

In The Innocents, the medical position is missing. Only the housekeeper seems to hold a position which is anti-supernatural. She interprets less from a strong rationalist position perhaps than the doctors in the other films, but perhaps not as Pro-supernatural as Miss Giddings does.

By the end of the film, Miles asserts that Giddings perception of things as “supernatural” is a form of madness. This leads to another interpretation of the supernatural in films. In Emily Rose, the supernatural represents an anti-rational position, whereas in The Innocents the supernatural implies a descent into madness.

For a look at the interpretation of the film click HERE.