Ashford University ENG 225: Introduction To Film
Director Ridley Scott, after his celebrated production of Alien, in 1985, chose to make another brilliantly shot film based on the conflict between goodness and evil. Its taglines insinuated the nature of the story to be told. The story, as it turned out, became essentially a flat fairy tale. The sharp images on the screen, while beautiful and typical of Scott’s work, did not help the story, according to a number of, some acclaimed, movie critics. Legend became, as Gene Siskel predicted, a legend, but not for the story it failed to tell. Following is a detailed analysis of the film, some of the critics’ common issues with it, and why, if it was such a flop, it has become a classic in British and American film.
Goodykoontz & Jacobs (2011) state that narrative structure is “the basic building block of any story” (p. 29). This is because the narrative structure of a story contains a number of literary elements that guide the story along. The five-act structure, for example, is displayed in this film by certain marked changes in tone. The exposition has a sweet, innocent tone, as we are introduced to young lovers Lily and Jack. The development, where we meet Darkness and discover his plan, is shadowed by a darker tone. The crisis is shown in a panic tone, as the scene becomes choppy, jumping quickly from one shot to the next with no transition as, in slow motion, the goblins kill the unicorn stallion. The climax is less panic, and more grim determination, as Jack disposes of Darkness into black hole. The resolution, then, is a calm, peaceful tone, as the elves revive the unicorn stallion and Jack wakes Lily from her powerful spell.
The story, according to Goodykoontz & Jacobs (2001) is “beyond what we see in the plot” (p. 30). The film has an omniscient point of view, where the audience is aware of everything going on within the plot, whereas the characters have limited knowledge. This knowledge extends to the story itself, although the characters may be aware of some points of the story. Indeed, it is helpful to read the scrolling text that opens this film, as it contains some background information on how the plot we are about to see came to be. It expresses elements of “the story” as opposed to “the plot” we will be watching in the film. The plot of the film follows time in sequence. What apparently happens first and last in the story does happen first and last in the film. The majority of the story takes place in a vast enchanted forest and in an underground cavern, the home of the prince of Darkness.
At first glance, the conflict appears to be between light and Darkness. The audience comes to find out, however, that the conflict is more between Darkness and those heroes sworn to protect the light, represented by the unicorns, from him. A few smaller conflicts all add up to protecting and restoring the light by killing Darkness. Early in the story, we find out that the main character Jack is the chosen champion of the forest, and so he is the only one who can kill Darkness. The conflict is resolved when he succeeds, reclaims the unicorn horn stolen by the goblins, and rescues Lily. There is some internal and some external conflict going on in the plot of this story. The main external conflict is the fight against Darkness to rescue Lily and the light. Lily and Jack also carry some internal conflict in the form of guilt. They did not realize the harm their innocent actions could bring on: Jack when he took Lily to see the unicorns, Lily when she touched the stallion.
Legend is based on symbolism. The prince of Darkness represents human vices such as greed, lust, and power-hunger. Jack represents goodness and heroism. Lily represents innocence and naiveté. Lily’s love for Jack and her desire to touch the unicorn shows humanity’s innate curiosity about goodness and purity, without regard to the harm that exercising that curiosity could possibly cause. The entire film is an allegory about the goodness and evil of humanity. The ethereal forest represents the brighter side of the human imagination: our desires to do good for one another above ourselves. The gloomy cavern home of Darkness represents the sinister side of the human imagination: our desires for influence, power, and wealth. The film plays on a constant battle between these two extremes. Jack and Lily, who fall in the gray area, but toward the light end of the spectrum, represent the way we see ourselves: basically good with a few minor flaws.
Situational irony occurs in the scene where Darkness is preparing to kill the unicorn mare. Lily, seemingly under his spell, requested to kill the unicorn herself. As he prays for his offering to be accepted, Lily raises her sword. As she brings it down with all her might, it swipes past the unicorn and cuts through the chain holding her. The freed unicorn rears and Lily shrieks for her to run away, which lands her a knockout slap from Darkness. The irony in the situation is that Lily acts as if, and therefore Jack, Gump, and the audience all believe, she intends to do what she requested. We learn from her shrieks that she had planned all along to release the unicorn from captivity with the blow. Slightly less ironic is Screwball’s volunteering for the dangerous mission to climb out of the caverns carrying a metal plate quite larger than himself, in order to reflect the rays of the sun below the earth. Throughout the film, Screwball is a frightened personality and frequently paranoid, especially within the cavern where he may well be roasted for the evening meal. His heroism close to the end of the film dramatically emphasizes the “good will triumph” theme of the story.
Screwball also contributes some verbal irony to the film. One particular line that comes to mind is in a scene where the team of heroes has decided to split up in Darkness’s caverns to look for Lily. After Jack explains the plan, Screwball quite seriously responds, “There’s only one thing I wanna know.” He pauses for dramatic effect, and then howls, “Why me?!”
Director Ridley Scott was viciously castigated in reviews for the relatively flat characters he used to tell his story. We know that Lily is a princess, but Scott does not elaborate at all. We know that she is friends with a peasant woman named Nell, but Scott does not tell us why or how. Indeed, the only importance of Nell seems to be to show Lily’s childish mischief as she releases the clothesline Nell is trying to hang, making it fall to the ground. Nell’s cottage, however, does show some foreshadowing as Lily looks at the clock, seeing the dancing figures freeze over for an instant.
One of the film’s taglines quotes, “No Good without Evil. No Love without Hate. No Innocence without Lust. I am Darkness.” This is a universal truth in that without the opposite end of a spectrum, we humans would not be able to decipher a certain quality. There can be no good without evil: for if there were no evil, how would we know what is good? There can be no love without hate, for hate is too strong an emotion to feel without passion, and passion requires love on some level. There can be no innocence without lust, for, as with good and evil, how would we know what to call innocent if no lust existed?
Tom Cruise stars as Jack, a woodland child who lives in harmony with the plants and animals in the celestial forest. Mia Sara is Lily, a princess who prefers to spend her days in the woods and surrounding fields, which hold “more magic for [her] than any palace in the world” (Legend, n.d.). Tim Curry, heavily clad in rubber, make-up, and voice synthesizer, is Darkness, a devil-like creature who’s desire for power and control of the universe leads him to send his minions into the forest in search of the unicorns, the symbol of light. Billy Barty, also disguised in a lot of rubber and make-up but easily recognizable by his voice, is the fairy/elf Screwball. A number of lesser-known actors fill the other necessary parts of the cast.
Tom Cruise, still making a name for himself at the production of this film, was actually a character actor who was usually thrown into roles of young heartthrobs. Today he would be highly regarded as a star whose personal life is often speculated about in tabloids. Mia Sara is a character actress, usually with bit parts in various films and television series. Though her debut appearance was as the female lead in this film, the majority of her career turned to background and supporting characters soon after.
Tim Curry is most definitely a wildcard actor, fitting seamlessly into any role offered to him and playing it to perfection. He has never had a starring role, but has done a remarkable job at bit and supporting parts in comedies and dramas alike. His deep voice and stylized quintessential British accent render him often requested for voice parts in animated productions as well. Billy Barty, a little person, was mostly a personality actor. He played himself the majority of his career as he filled parts for mature children, fantasy characters, and little people. While the stylization of his acting varied according to the part, his characters were often similar to one another. The genre of the film almost requires stylized acting. Realism is impossible in such a wildly fantastic setting. Perhaps there is some method acting within the relationship of Jack and Lily, but the characters really do not seem deep enough to require it.
Billy Barty is to be commended for the aptly named character of Screwball. His cowardly and “screwball” antics add to the story. Particularly in situations where the other characters charge bravely onward to the rescue, Screwball tags along behind unless ordered by Gump to lead, grumbling all the while. Screwball embodies the part of humanity that is afraid to test the waters of evil: that has no curiosity about the dark side whatsoever.
Tom Cruise presents Jack as a fiercely loyal, if naïve, young man who understands vividly what happened and what he must do to fix it. Throughout the film, he remains the only character who appears to be serious the whole time. Even Gump, following his tirade, appears light and friendly much of the time. Mia Sara presents Lily as sweet and innocent, but she does have a spoiled side, shown by her sabotage of Nell’s laundry and the challenge she issues Jack by tossing her ring into the river. Through much of the film, she portrays an adolescent self-indulgent princess, though she is bright and cunning when the time calls for it, as shown by her sudden apparent change in attitude toward Darkness. Tim Curry’s portrayal of Darkness is perhaps the deepest presentation of any of the characters. His evil is propelled by desperation to live. His desire for Lily seems uncharacteristic as he attempts to seduce her with promises of love. He seems tentative and vulnerable, a wide variation from the imposing evil lord he presents through the rest of the film.
In this case, the majority of the performances seem to be akin to the director’s fantasy. The characters are shallow compared to the amazing art of the setting. Ridley Scott is famous for his vivid pictures, but not so much for his characters, and the characters here depict the reasons for that. Most of the movement by the “good guys” in this film is running in a low or crouched position, which shows the fear and urgency of the situation. Lily’s movements, with the brief exception of Darkness’s seduction, are open and deliberate, showing again her somewhat spoiled but goodhearted nature.
Director Scott uses wide, sweeping shots to orient the audience, in which the entire mise en scene is viewable. Medium shots and close ups are reserved mostly to focus on certain events. In the beginning and end of the film, high key lighting simulating bright sunlight and a happier mood is used. Throughout the majority, however, low key to very low-key lighting is used to show the gloom in which Darkness rules. Much of the film is saturated, giving it the fantasy flavor it was intended to have.
Depending on the individual scene, distance and angle are relatively steady. High angles are used in the sacrifice ceremony scene to view the scene as Jack sees it, with Lily far from him. Symbolically, she is far from him, wrapped in Darkness’s spell. High angles are also used to film Screwball’s climb out of the cavern, showing not only the distance of the climb, but to show his willingness to overcome cowardice to save the day.
The shots are primarily objective, with a few subjective thrown into certain scenes. Subjective views are used mainly in specific conversations and upon discovering the sacrifice ceremony. Some critics insinuate the entire film is special effects. Most cuts between scenes in the film are straight cuts to simultaneous events.
Legend takes on a five-act structure. In the first act, a variety of scenes, both wide and close up shots, are fixed on the main points of the story: Jack, Lily, and the unicorns. The second act, development, is very short. It begins with Lily’s movement toward the unicorns as she goes to touch one and ends in the crisis. The crisis begins immediately following, as, distracted by Lily, the stallion is shot by one of the goblins and continues until Darkness is vanquished. This is actually the majority of the film, as Jack is elected the resident hero by the fairies and proceeds to rescue Lily and the unicorn mare. Resolution begins with Jack finding the ring Lily threw into the stream early in the film and using it to revive her.
Coverage is the use of the same scene shot from a different angle. This can be seen in a number of scenes in the film, as angles change to take in mise en scene. The film appears to show continuity editing, though, as the Internet Movie Database points out, there are a number of mistakes that were not caught or edited out before the release of the film. Shot lengths vary the rhythm of the film. In the beginning, the shots appear to be longer and smoother, to simulate the peace and happiness felt by the lovers. The battle shots are shorter and the editing slightly choppier to portray the urgency and suspense of the scenes. Slow motion is used sparingly at the end of the film when Jack makes his dive to finally find Lily’s ring. It shows that peace has returned after the epic battle and he is able to move at a more leisurely pace.
The dialogue in the film really does not tell the story so much as aid in telling. The story is really told by the dazzling scenery, the action, and the music. Sound effects are used primarily in the kitchen scenes, where the point is to instill fear that the heroes will be eaten before they can save the day. Knives and plates crashing together, fire crackling, and the heavy footsteps of the guardsmen/cooks are the main sound effects. Once the heroes discover a way to get sunlight into the cave, a wind-whipping sound effect is used as they toss Darkness’s giant silver plates to one another in assembly-line fashion. The music is mainly orchestral and moves with the action of the film. In the slower, sweeter scenes, the music is slow and sweet, likewise with faster, more suspenseful scenes.
The film is directed by Ridley Scott, whose films resume includes Alien and Bladerunner. His competence as a director is not questioned. He shows favoritism for fantasy, a distinguishable personality. The interior meaning in this particular film seems to be explicitly stated by Darkness, that there can be no good without evil. It is plainly clear that the director believes that, though there is some evil in all of us, good will prevail.
Ridley Scott seems to favor telling unrealistic stories. Legend does make any attempt at realism. In fact, it almost scoffs at it. Alien and Bladerunner appear to have had a similar distaste for reality. Scott specializes in escapism. There is nothing in his films to suggest reality. They are brightly colored with unrealistic lighting contrasts, such as the brightness of the forest compared to Darkness’s lair. The version I have is a videocassette copy of the original release. Many of the scenes I found on Movieclips.com are from the newly released director’s cut, with a lot of the original material replaced. Parts of scenes that I have not seen are available there. I choose not to discuss them because I have not seen the director’s cut in its entirety.
I think the gray area between good and evil, and how good battles evil is a regular social subject. It plays out in every arena, from politics and international relations, to personal relationships, in all ages, races, and communities. Legend cannot be confused for anything but fantasy, though there are a number of horror, romantic, and comedy elements to it. I would call this a “genre film.” It is a classical fantasy with a somewhat muddled story and rather shallow characters. The primary purpose of it appears to be to set the audience in Ridley Scott’s fantasy world. The inclusion of unicorns in a film automatically dubs it a fantasy, but the bright over-saturated coloring also depicts this genre. There is little to understand about the film, other than the obvious comment that there is good and bad in everyone, even the most innocent.
Referential content is the film synopsis. Per Internet Movie Database, “A young man must stop the Lord of Darkness from both destroying daylight and marrying the woman he loves.” The referential content is how he does that. Explicit content in the film is what is said or shown. Darkness actually says the theme of the film, that there can be no good without evil. There is some slightly implied sexual content in the seduction scene. Lily’s exceedingly low-cut black dress and Darkness’s conversation with his “father” about his desire for her imply an aura of sex, though it is not really covered anywhere else in the film.
Symptomatic content of Legend appears to be just “keeping up with the Joneses.” Fantasy and Sci-Fi films were the rage in the late 80’s. The year 1985 was a year of a number of fantasy/sci-fi films, such as Back to the Future, Ewoks: The Battle for Endor, The Goonies, and Return to Oz. It was also a year of films featuring young, good-looking leading men, such as The Breakfast Club, Girls Just Want to Have Fun, and Teen Wolf. There appears to be little going on in the world that would spark another fantasy film to be made, though Legend seems to be just one in the melting pot of 1985 impossible-setting films.
Legend really seems to require an auteurist approach to analysis. From the beginning, it implicitly screams that it is a work of art in the surreal category, and really should not be taken for much more. Attempting to analyze it any other way, as it appears many movie critics of the time did, gives it a rather bleak outlook. Still, it is a visually stunning film, even if the story and characters are a bit banal as suggested by critics. A more modern film with similar strengths and weaknesses would be James Cameron’s Avatar. Mr. Scott and Mr. Cameron would do well to make a film together, though it seems it would turn out to be a wildly beautiful fantasy commenting on very basic truths with a rather underdeveloped storyline.
Legend was, indeed, a legend. It was a huge hit at the box office, but probably not for its flat storyline. The reasons Legend remains a talked-about film are that it was directed by Ridley Scott, that it is a visually beautiful film, and that there is a lot of fire. It would have been just as lovely as a painting, but Ridley Scott is a filmmaker, not a painter. The film is a work of art and to be admired for such, even if the story it tells uses flat, two-dimensional characters to make a vague comment most people have heard a dozen times.
References
Boyar, J. (1986, April 22). ‘Legend' is a loser, despite cast and sets :[3 star Edition]. Orlando Sentinel,p. E1. Retrieved April 18, 2011, from Orlando Sentinel.
Canby, V. (1986, April 18). The screen: Ridley Scott’s ‘Legend’. New York Times. Retrieved April 18, 2011 from http://www.nytimes.com/1986/04/18/movies/the-screen-ridley-scott-s-legend.html?pagewanted=print
Ebert, R. (1986, April 18). Legend. Chicago Sun Times. Retrieved April 18, 2011 from http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19860418/REVIEWS/604180302/1023&template=printart
Goodykoontz, B., & Jacobs, C. P. (2011). Film: From Watching to Seeing. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education, Inc. https://content.ashford.edu
Janusonis, M. (1986, April 21). Movie review Surface glitter the stuff Legend is made of. Providence Journal,p. B-12. Retrieved April 19, 2011, from ProQuest Newsstand
Legend. [n.d.]. The Internet Movie Database. Retrieved April 18, 2011, from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089469/
Milchan, A. & Grace, J.P. (Producers), & Scott, R. (Director). (1985). Legend [Motion picture]. UK: Universal Pictures. Clips available at http://movieclips.com/WiZpP-legend-movie-videos/
Myers Knight-Ridder, R. (1996, June 5). The rise and fall of fantasy films. Albany Times Union. Retrieved April 19, 2011 from http://albarchive.merlinone.net/mweb/wmsql.wm.request?oneimage&imageid=5816893
Parks, L. (1986, April 21). `Legend' is fun trip for adults and children :[No star Edition]. Houston Chronicle (pre-1997 Fulltext),p. 6. Retrieved April 18, 2011, from ProQuest Newsstand.
Siskel, G. (1986, April 18). 'Legend' may become one, but for all the wrong reasons.: [Sports Final, CN Edition]. Chicago Tribune (pre-1997 Fulltext),p. N. Retrieved April 18, 2011, from Chicago Tribune
THOMAS, K. (1986, April 18). Movie review `Legend': Light, dark, and unicorns :[Home Edition]. Los Angeles Times (pre-1997 Fulltext),p. 4. Retrieved April 18, 2011, from Los Angeles Times.