OVER - 2015 - JORN THRELFALL

 OVER (2015), directed by Jorn Threlfall

Over, directed by Jorn Threlfall in 2015, is a bafta-nominated, 14-minute long short film, in which events surrounding a crime scene unfold in  reverse order.

The film is based on the true life story of Jose Matada, who fell from a BA plane approaching its landing from Angola into Heathrow Airport in 2012.

“I didn’t want to tell it (the story) in a conventional way. This story was so sad and desperate it needed a different way of telling… it’s like shards and fragments.”

Expectations:

I thought the title suggested a tragedy or the idea of something being over, in which something transitional occurs. However, equally, I thought there could be a sense of hope as perhaps something awful could be ‘over’.

Screen grabs and micro-element/narrative structure analysis:

The film is told through a series of static long shots which draw out the story, creating suspense in the viewer. I think the narrative is particularly effective in that it is told in reverse order, so we have to piece together the story for ourselves. The audience members have to be active in the making of meaning. After all, Threlfall has said, “I make the viewer be the detective.”

The opening shot to the film is a very long take. Movement occurs inside the frame and the camera does not move. Instead, it is still and static. The time of day that the director chooses to film at is important as it approaching night time, and therefore creates stronger emotions in the audience.

This close up acts as plot point 1 as it is when we first realise what has happened. As flowers are placed on the side of a road, we are aware that an accident has happened and somebody has sadly passed away… However, we do not know how. The lighting in this shot is dark and moody, creating a sombre atmosphere.

In this shot, the camera tilts and dolly’s upwards into the trees and we can observe the gentle swaying of the branches. This cut away is a break from the tension, allowing the viewer to take a moment to process what has just happened. 

At this point, I was convinced that a car accident had occurred as this long shot shows someone moving a car off the street. However, it is still a mystery. From the shot of someone cleaning blood off the road, to this one and then the ones later on when the police arrive, the audience are made to piece the story together for themselves.

Throughout the film, there are cuts aways to close ups of the personal belongings of the victim that are put into zip locked bags for detection. From these cut aways, we learn more about the victim: what they wear, what they carry with them, who their family are…

For example, this photo shows the victims family, which ultimately makes the story more sad and evokes sympathy in the audience as we know that he had a family who he was probably close with seeing as he carried a picture of them with him. The mise-en-scene contributes to the sense of sadness.

From the ziplock with blood covered tissues that are said to be from his ears, we understand that the victim was probably in a high pressure environment before his death, giving us more clues and hints to what happened. The pace of the editing concerning these cut aways is important to note as although we can process the items, there is no time for thoughts to linger with us before we move on to the next long shot.

Through every long shot we see the events unfold from a different angle. In this long shot, the framing makes the amount of people who have been called to help clear. We know that this was quite a severe accident, and the mise-en-scene of the high-vis police jackets, the tape and the police cars, contrasted with the nature, makes the scene more tense.

This shot is where we finally see the accident happen. The victim who we have previously seen lying on the street is no longer there, so we anticipate the accident before it happens. The use of diegetic sound gave away to me what happened before it did: the noise of a large airbus flying over the street. However, although I anticipated that the victim would fall from the plane, it was nonetheless a jump scare when he did. This is the only camera angle that is reused throughout the film and it mirrors the opening camera angle, so we can create connections between the opening and ending sequence. There is also irony and therefore a sense of sadness created when the car alarm goes off and the neighbour turns it off, but does not see the man - we realise how long he lies there before he is noticed. 

The director could have left us with an open ending, but due to the fact that the film is based off true events, the director leaves the true story with us, which is very impactful and sad. At this point we hear the first use of non-diegetic soundtrack which is eerie, slow music, which evokes fear.

I must quickly note the use of sound throughout the film. As we see the events in reverse chronological order, there is little to no sound used. The only diegetic sound we hear are muffled conversations of policemen and the people who walk by, birds chirping, the plane flying over the street and notably the sound of the car alarm which emphasises the sense of tragedy since it signals that something terrible has happened. The camera does not track any conversation, which ultimately makes the film more eerie. 

My response:

The fact that the story is based on a real life event, that happened in 2012, makes the story all the more impactful. Although I do not remember the event, it made me reflect on a similar tragedy that happened in 2020. The film left me shaken for a while after having watched it, which proves to me that it was a well-produced film. The cinematography and sound were the most important micro-elements in shaping my response to the film.