research paper scene analysis

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Film Writing: Sample Analysis

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

Introductory Note

The analysis below discusses the opening moments of the science fiction movie  Ex Machina  in order to make an argument about the film's underlying purpose. The text of the analysis is formatted normally. Editor's commentary, which will occasionally interrupt the piece to discuss the author's rhetorical strategies, is written in brackets in an italic font with a bold "Ed.:" identifier. See the examples below:

The text of the analysis looks like this.

[ Ed.:  The editor's commentary looks like this. ]

Frustrated Communication in Ex Machina ’s Opening Sequence

Alex Garland’s 2015 science fiction film Ex Machina follows a young programmer’s attempts to determine whether or not an android possesses a consciousness complicated enough to pass as human. The film is celebrated for its thought-provoking depiction of the anxiety over whether a nonhuman entity could mimic or exceed human abilities, but analyzing the early sections of the film, before artificial intelligence is even introduced, reveals a compelling examination of humans’ inability to articulate their thoughts and feelings. In its opening sequence, Ex Machina establishes that it’s not only about the difficulty of creating a machine that can effectively talk to humans, but about human beings who struggle to find ways to communicate with each other in an increasingly digital world.

[ Ed.:  The piece's opening introduces the film with a plot summary that doesn't give away too much and a brief summary of the critical conversation that has centered around the film. Then, however, it deviates from this conversation by suggesting that Ex Machina has things to say about humanity before non-human characters even appear. Off to a great start. ]

The film’s first establishing shots set the action in a busy modern office. A woman sits at a computer, absorbed in her screen. The camera looks at her through a glass wall, one of many in the shot. The reflections of passersby reflected in the glass and the workspace’s dim blue light make it difficult to determine how many rooms are depicted. The camera cuts to a few different young men typing on their phones, their bodies partially concealed both by people walking between them and the camera and by the stylized modern furniture that surrounds them. The fourth shot peeks over a computer monitor at a blonde man working with headphones in. A slight zoom toward his face suggests that this is an important character, and the cut to a point-of-view shot looking at his computer screen confirms this. We later learn that this is Caleb Smith (Domhnall Gleeson), a young programmer whose perspective the film follows.

The rest of the sequence cuts between shots from Caleb’s P.O.V. and reaction shots of his face, as he receives and processes the news that he has won first prize in a staff competition. Shocked, Caleb dives for his cellphone and texts several people the news. Several people immediately respond with congratulatory messages, and after a moment the woman from the opening shot runs in to give him a hug. At this point, the other people in the room look up, smile, and start clapping, while Caleb smiles disbelievingly—perhaps even anxiously—and the camera subtly zooms in a bit closer. Throughout the entire sequence, there is no sound other than ambient electronic music that gets slightly louder and more textured as the sequence progresses. A jump cut to an aerial view of a glacial landscape ends the sequence and indicates that Caleb is very quickly transported into a very unfamiliar setting, implying that he will have difficulty adjusting to this sudden change in circumstances.

[ Ed.:  These paragraphs are mostly descriptive. They give readers the information they will need to understand the argument the piece is about to offer. While passages like this can risk becoming boring if they dwell on unimportant details, the author wisely limits herself to two paragraphs and maintains a driving pace through her prose style choices (like an almost exclusive reliance on active verbs). ]

Without any audible dialogue or traditional expository setup of the main characters, this opening sequence sets viewers up to make sense of Ex Machina ’s visual style and its exploration of the ways that technology can both enhance and limit human communication. The choice to make the dialogue inaudible suggests that in-person conversations have no significance. Human-to-human conversations are most productive in this sequence when they are mediated by technology. Caleb’s first response when he hears his good news is to text his friends rather than tell the people sitting around him, and he makes no move to take his headphones out when the in-person celebration finally breaks out. Everyone in the building is on their phones, looking at screens, or has headphones in, and the camera is looking at screens through Caleb’s viewpoint for at least half of the sequence.  

Rather than simply muting the specific conversations that Caleb has with his coworkers, the ambient soundtrack replaces all the noise that a crowded building in the middle of a workday would ordinarily have. This silence sets the uneasy tone that characterizes the rest of the film, which is as much a horror-thriller as a piece of science fiction. Viewers get the sense that all the sounds that humans make as they walk around and talk to each other are being intentionally filtered out by some presence, replaced with a quiet electronic beat that marks the pacing of the sequence, slowly building to a faster tempo. Perhaps the sound of people is irrelevant: only the visual data matters here. Silence is frequently used in the rest of the film as a source of tension, with viewers acutely aware that it could be broken at any moment. Part of the horror of the research bunker, which will soon become the film’s primary setting, is its silence, particularly during sequences of Caleb sneaking into restricted areas and being startled by a sudden noise.

The visual style of this opening sequence reinforces the eeriness of the muted humans and electronic soundtrack. Prominent use of shallow focus to depict a workspace that is constructed out of glass doors and walls makes it difficult to discern how large the space really is. The viewer is thus spatially disoriented in each new setting. This layering of glass and mirrors, doubling some images and obscuring others, is used later in the film when Caleb meets the artificial being Ava (Alicia Vikander), who is not allowed to leave her glass-walled living quarters in the research bunker. The similarity of these spaces visually reinforces the film’s late revelation that Caleb has been manipulated by Nathan Bates (Oscar Isaac), the troubled genius who creates Ava.

[ Ed.:  In these paragraphs, the author cites the information about the scene she's provided to make her argument. Because she's already teased the argument in the introduction and provided an account of her evidence, it doesn't strike us as unreasonable or far-fetched here. Instead, it appears that we've naturally arrived at the same incisive, fascinating points that she has. ]

A few other shots in the opening sequence more explicitly hint that Caleb is already under Nathan’s control before he ever arrives at the bunker. Shortly after the P.O.V shot of Caleb reading the email notification that he won the prize, we cut to a few other P.O.V. shots, this time from the perspective of cameras in Caleb’s phone and desktop computer. These cameras are not just looking at Caleb, but appear to be scanning him, as the screen flashes in different color lenses and small points appear around Caleb’s mouth, eyes, and nostrils, tracking the smallest expressions that cross his face. These small details indicate that Caleb is more a part of this digital space than he realizes, and also foreshadow the later revelation that Nathan is actively using data collected by computers and webcams to manipulate Caleb and others. The shots from the cameras’ perspectives also make use of a subtle fisheye lens, suggesting both the wide scope of Nathan’s surveillance capacities and the slightly distorted worldview that motivates this unethical activity.

[ Ed.: This paragraph uses additional details to reinforce the piece's main argument. While this move may not be as essential as the one in the preceding paragraphs, it does help create the impression that the author is noticing deliberate patterns in the film's cinematography, rather than picking out isolated coincidences to make her points. ]

Taken together, the details of Ex Machina ’s stylized opening sequence lay the groundwork for the film’s long exploration of the relationship between human communication and technology. The sequence, and the film, ultimately suggests that we need to develop and use new technologies thoughtfully, or else the thing that makes us most human—our ability to connect through language—might be destroyed by our innovations. All of the aural and visual cues in the opening sequence establish a world in which humans are utterly reliant on technology and yet totally unaware of the nefarious uses to which a brilliant but unethical person could put it.

Author's Note:  Thanks to my literature students whose in-class contributions sharpened my thinking on this scene .

[ Ed.: The piece concludes by tying the main themes of the opening sequence to those of the entire film. In doing this, the conclusion makes an argument for the essay's own relevance: we need to pay attention to the essay's points so that we can achieve a rich understanding of the movie. The piece's final sentence makes a chilling final impression by alluding to the danger that might loom if we do not understand the movie. This is the only the place in the piece where the author explicitly references how badly we might be hurt by ignorance, and it's all the more powerful for this solitary quality. A pithy, charming note follows, acknowledging that the author's work was informed by others' input (as most good writing is). Beautifully done. ]

• How to Cite
• Language & Lit
• Rhyme & Rhythm
• The Rewrite
• Search Glass

How to Write a Scene Analysis

Writing a scene analysis requires a thorough understanding of not only the scene you choose to dissect but also the overall film or play. Scenes need to move the story forward and reveal information about the characters. When you break down a scene, you uncover the writer's intention as well as how the work resonates with you.

Watch the entire movie and choose the scene you wish to analyze. Pick something with an analyzable theme.

Focus on the scene you have chosen. Watch it a few times in a row.

Take notes on the scene. Study the way the characters interact and what that says about each character. Dissect the choice of camera angles and the scene's setting and overall purpose.

Formulate a hypothesis based on a fact you want to prove about the scene you chose.

Write an introductory paragraph stating your hypothesis as well as the relationship of this scene to the rest of the film.

Formulate three supporting paragraphs. Each one should bring to light a different point to prove your theory. Include quotes to strengthen your analysis.

Summarize the scene analysis in a conclusion paragraph. Tie together your points with the hypothesis and the theme of the film you have focused on.

• Do not get too specific, as you need enough information to write the paper. Start with a broader hypothesis, and break down the smaller parts to prove the more general idea.
• Remember that characters add to the theme as much as the words and actions do. Think about breaking down your supporting paragraphs to examine a different part of the scene in each. One section for character, one for setting and one for cinematography is an example.
• Typical scene analysis comes in the form of a five-paragraph essay. You can expand out your points if you need to write a longer paper.
• Pick a scene many are familiar with or at least a movie most can relate to. If someone has not seen or read what you are talking about, he will find it difficult to understand your point of view. If you want to choose something obscure, bring in a copy of the scene you have analyzed.

Things You'll Need

Pharaba Witt has worked as a writer in Los Angeles for more than 10 years. She has written for websites such as USA Today, Red Beacon, LIVESTRONG, WiseGeek, Web Series Network, Nursing Daily and major film studios. When not traveling she enjoys outdoor activities such as backpacking, snowboarding, ice climbing and scuba diving. She is constantly researching equipment and seeking new challenges.

Setting the Scene: Best Practices for Writing Materials and Methods

• Peer Review
• Research Process

This free white paper tackles the best ways to write the Materials and Methods section of a scientific manuscript.

Updated on March 3, 2014

The Materials and Methods (or “Methods section”) is the section of a research paper that provides the reader

with all the information needed to understand your work and how the reported results were produced. Having read

the Introduction, the reader already knows why your work is important, so the next step is to connect that section to

the experimental design used to address your research questions.

Below is a preview of our free white paper tackling the best way to write the Materials and Methods section of a scientific manuscript. It covers the following topics:

Purpose and Structure

• Key Information
• Notation and Terminology
• Equipment and Materials Citations
• Acquisition and Definition of the Results
• Statistical Methods
• Concluding Statements

Depending on the type of paper, the Methods section can encompass anything from the parameters of a literature search to the methods employed in a field study to the details of bench work in the lab. The common feature is that the information needs to be presented in a way that is clear and familiar to the reader. It is important to note that the purpose of the Methods section is not just to convey what you did; a thorough and well-organized Methods section reflects your knowledge and understanding of appropriate research techniques and increases the reader's confidence in your work.

The Methods section is easiest to follow when it begins by providing a clear context for the detailed descriptions of the methods and materials used in the study. This context is best achieved by beginning with general characteristics and parameters (e.g., identification of sample sources or populations, descriptions of geographic areas, or characterizations of study participants). A reader who understands the foundation of your experiments will more easily understand the procedures that follow.

The underlying principle for what information to provide in the Methods section is that the reader should be able to replicate your study. This section must explain the methods used with enough detail to answer any of the reader's questions about how the study was performed. Because the Methods section is meant to convey how the research was conducted, conforming to the accepted conventions of the field is extremely important.

Generally, the Methods section should assemble familiar concepts and research activities into a logical series of events. Terminology and sentence structure should be consistent within the paper and conform to the conventions of the field, and repetition is accepted or even expected. Because Methods sections often rely on lists of information, consistency - i.e., the presentation of like elements using the same terminology, notation, and sentence structure - is especially important.

The information in the Methods section should follow the order of execution as closely as possible, although similar procedures should be presented together. For example, descriptions of sample or data collection should be described together, even if these are performed at different times or with intervening analysis, because a purely chronological account would mean switching back and forth between procedures.

Continue reading "Setting the Scene: Best Practices for Writing Materials and Methods" by downloading the full white paper here .

Check out our other "Best Practices for Writing" white papers to get tips for other sections of your research manuscript:

Getting a Strong Start: Best Practices for Writing an Introduction

Reaping the Rewards: Best Practices for Writing a Results Section

Michael Bendiksby, PhD

See our "Privacy Policy"

A Guide to Narratological Film Analysis

• University of Cologne

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Gary Manuel Gómez Espinoza

• N. Tülay ŞEKER
• Adriano Ferreira da-Silva

• Edson Aparecido Liberti

• Christoph Bietz
• Frank Beaver
• Miklós Kiss
• Steven Willemsen
• Sarah Kozloff

• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up