The King of Crime Dramas

Jerry Bruckheimer is known as a prominent feature film and television producer in Hollywood. Bruckheimer’s name has blown up in the past few years, almost as much as his action packed feature films like, “The Pirates of the Caribbean” and “National Treasure”. Besides producing major feature films, he has developed several television series, including all of the CSI’s, Without a Trace, and Cold Case. The crime shows Bruckheimer has produced in the past several years have graced the Nielsen Top 25 Television Shows each week. As a regular viewer of CSI: Miami and Without a Trace, when it was still on air, I have identified several textual elements that Bruckheimer features throughout most of his action packed films and television programs to create a suspenseful atmosphere for viewers and to engage audience members in the thrill of finding the suspect. Bruckheimer uses three basic ingredients to create the perfect crime dramas for his mass audiences, close up shots of characters, a shallow focus, and establishing shots.

Jerry Bruckheimer has produced over thirty feature films and is regarded in the industry as one of the most successful movie producers of all time. However, before he began producing major motion pictures, he started writing and producing television advertisements. His most successful television shows are CSI: Crime Scene Investigation and his reality television show The Amazing Race. Bruckheimer currently has six television shows on the air and, at one point in time, had three of his TV series ranked among the top 10 in the ratings. This is considered a unique feat in television. Bruckheimer has been named the most powerful person in Hollywood in 2003 and has received various other nominations including several Academy Awards, Golden Globes, and Emmy’s for his work. Bruckheimer has been stated as saying his main goal for producing television is to, “transport audiences from one place to another”. He found his niche in writing crime dramas and action storylines after co-producing “Beverly Hills Cop” in 1977. This launched Bruckheimer into a whole new era of film and television production. During one of his on-air interviews on the DVD of Pirates of the Caribbean he is particularly concerned with creating a visual image; this is due in part to his love of photography. Bruckheimer wants to be able to capture a scene with a single photo and have that one snapshot explain everything that is going on.

The first textual element that is prevalent throughout both CSI: Miami and Without a Trace would be the close up shots on all of the main characters. A close up is when the actor is framed from his or her chest to just above his or her head. It is a very personal way to frame a character. Bruckheimer uses close up shots because he wants his audience to notice and focus on the facial expressions of the characters. This allows the viewer to easily relate to how the character is feeling and how they are dealing with the current situation, be it a murder or a missing child. During one particular scene in CSI: Miami, Senior Detective Sgt. Frank Tripp and Crime Scene Investigator Ryan Wolfe are having a serious conversation at a crime scene that Wolfe is not welcome at. Close up shots are used throughout this conversation, which ends up turning into an argument, to portray the hostility between Wolfe and Tripp.

Without the close up shot it would be difficult to read a characters expression and to see how they are feeling when faced with serious situations. In this particular situation Tripp is upset that Wolfe shows up at the crime scene and Wolfe is smirking, which suggest he understands the hostility he has created by appearing. Audience members tend to develop relationships with characters on television shows and it is easier for viewers to do so when it is readable on a character’s face, which is why close up shots are important.

In almost all of Bruckheimer’s shows is a camera trick called shallow focus. A shallow focus is when a small depth of field, with just one plane (the foreground, the middle-ground, or the background) is in focus. Bruckheimer uses a shallow focus to make the main characters stand out from the rest of the scene. Many times throughout the show there are things going on in the background in order to develop a sense of a real workplace or a real crime scene. In one particular clip of CSI: Miami, Horatio and Eric are discussing a potential suspect and in the background you can see the hallway of their office. There are many people walking by and there is equipment all over but the main focus is on Horatio and Eric’s conversation.

The background is slightly hazy and out of focus in order to draw attention away from it and towards the characters, which are very much in focus. When combined with the close up shot it makes the viewer feel more intimate with the characters and gives them the opportunity to feel like they are part of the investigation.

The last, but very important textual element, is the establishing shot. An establishing shot is a long shot that positions characters within their environments and helps to establish a setting. CSI: Miami and Without a Trace both take place in large cities and have crime scenes in various settings. It is important for viewers to understand what environment the characters are situated in so they can establish an emotional response to what may be going on. For example, a child might be lost in a dark storeroom which creates a sense of excitement for viewers. Both shows use this technique, especially when switching between characters, so viewers can reestablish their focus on a character or situation. In this scene of Without a Trace, Bruckheimer uses the establishing shot after the woman leaves the elevator to portray that the characters are back in their main office.

By showing the elevator, the hallway, and the other people moving in and out of the offices a viewer knows where the characters are. Normally these establishing shots last a few seconds and then the camera zooms in to a medium close up, above the chest of the character, or to a close up in order to follow a conversation taking place.

Jerry Bruckheimer is a very prominent and powerful man in the entertainment industry. Almost all of his shows have lasted longer than five seasons and generally are replayed on expanded cable networks throughout the week. When these textual elements such as, the close up shot, shallow focus, and establishing shots, are mixed together they create a television crime drama that transports viewers into the storyline to help these detectives and investigators solve the next crime or disappearance. Bruckheimer uses these elements to create a thrilling crime drama that reels viewers in and keeps them there for several seasons.



Works Cited

“Jerry Bruckheimer.” Wikipedia. 12 10 2009. Wikimedia Foundation Inc., Web. 13 Oct 2009.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Bruckheimer.

“Producer’s Photo Diary with Jerry Bruckheimer.” (supplementary material on DVD release of
The Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl). 2002. DVD. Jerry
Bruckheimer Films, 2003.

“Jerry Bruckheimer.” Hollywood.com. 2009. Isn’t It Time You Went Hollywood, Web. 19 Oct
2009. http://www.hollywood.com/celebrity/195797/Jerry_Bruckheimer.

YouTube Clips Featured on Blog

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLMImNEDYX4 “Elevator and Office Scene” Establishing

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4KS0JykvPg “Tripp and Wolfe CSI: Miami” Close-Up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X5MiE58tcI “CSI: Miami” Shallow Focus

*All textual elements are at the beginning of each clip*

With A Little Help from My Friends

Starting off as a new television critic is, to some extent, terrifying. There are many approaches that a critic can take while evaluating television shows. Throughout my adventure I will be learning certain approaches to criticism that will eventually help focus and direct my critiques. In the past six months I have definitely expanded my knowledge as a television viewer, especially after a hefty purchase of a 32 inch plasma television that sits perfectly atop my dresser in my bedroom. This was the beginning of the end, seeing as now I have spent relentless hours watching an embarrassingly large amount of programming on cable networks. Although I love sitting and watching reruns of Wifeswap I have never been the type of person who strictly views anything, let alone television, with only one interpretation. This is one thing I hope to bring to the table as a new television critic. Throughout my semester long adventure I hope to convince my readers that, even as a beginning television critic, I can attempt to interpret a program but I may not always be right. My hope is that by helping people become better at analyzing television themselves they will then understand and help me reevaluate my own interpretation of certain programs. As I always say, “two heads are better than one”.

As a television critic, I do not intend on swaying people in one particular direction. I understand that people interpret everything differently and there is absolutely no fault in doing just that. My job as a new critic is to open up viewer’s eyes to different possible aspects of a program such as Sons of Anarchy or Real Chance of Love: Back in the Saddle. Television isn’t just “what you see is what you get”, this comes into play with critics because they aren’t always right. As Sillars and Gronbeck (2001) pointed out, “A communication critic makes an argument that describes, interprets, or evaluates….The definition is general because the specific purposes of particular critics are so varied.” (5) My eventual goal for people who read my blog is not only to understand what I am discussing but to open up more doors for analysis and to potentially see something I may not have noticed. I do not plan on terrorizing individuals when they disagree with my analysis. O’Donnell (2007) states that critics are capable of transforming, “As a critic, you become a ‘transformer’ capable of generating new understanding and new awareness in the minds of other television viewers.” (4) I hope to transform people’s opinions but I would also take pleasure in people making their own decisions, O’Donnell (2007) “the critic serves as a guide, offering standards of criteria for judgment along with factual data, so readers can make up their own minds.” (5)

Whichever program a person may view will eventually influence what they believe to be true about cultures or specific values. Corner (1999) discusses this very idea, “all of the television which we watch will bring about some modification in our knowledge and experience, however minor and temporary.” (6) Critics can be very powerful in modifying knowledge in people as well; television isn’t the only thing to possess this power. As a critic it is important for my own viewpoints to come through but everyone should be capable of correcting my errors of faulty criticisms. Individuals should be critical while viewing certain programs because each of us has had experiences separate from others and this is what makes a good piece of criticism. O’Donnell (2007) articulates that before we even begin to watch television we have certain perceptions, “Our perceptions are based on our values, beliefs, attitudes, and experiences.” (6) People come from so many different places and each television viewing experience is not the same. I believe anyone can be a critic or can help a new critic, such as myself, develop better and stronger ideas. Butler (2002) discusses the idea of polysemy, “…conflicting meanings reside within the same program and facilitate the viewing pleasure of a broad range of individuals. With so many different meanings being signified, we are bound to find some that agree with our world view.” (10) Hopefully, you as readers of this blog can help me achieve this broad range of interpretations throughout the semester.

Relating to people has never been a problem for me and I hope to come off easy to understand and enjoyable to read. I enjoy relating to people through humor and stories about my experiences. I also want to improve my critical ability by listening to other people’s experiences and potentially interpreting programs through another reader’s lens. Butler (2002) mentions television as becoming a “participatory model” (15) in which people are creating their own programs for other people to view their ideas through communication channels such as YouTube. This is exactly how I want people to view my blog. It should be a place where anyone can actively engage and argue about my own interpretations about television.

After this lengthy piece, what exactly is my point? My point is that I want to hear from you! I want readers to feel comfortable telling me what they think about my critique of a particular episode of Tool Academy. I also want readers to understand that more than likely the shows I am analyzing are ones I secretly enjoy. I would be the first person in line to watch a brand new reality television show on VH1, so as much as I want to hate those trashy shows, those are a majority of what I watch. Please feel free to help me interpret and understand all of the shows from your perspective as well as from mine.

Works Cited

Butler, J. (2002). Television: Critical Methods and Applications (2nd ed). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Corner, J. (1999). Critical Ideas in Television Studies. New York: Oxford University Press.

O’Donnell, V. (2007). Television Criticism. New York: Sage.

Sillars, M. O. and Gronbeck, B. E. (2001). Communication Criticism: Rhetoric, Social Codes, Cultural Studies. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.