Spaces and Looks in Sleepless in Seattle

Mark Garrett Cooper, in his article “Narrative Spaces” discusses the way that story is built through film. He believes that the shot, and the editing process, are not the basis of the language of cinema, but that the “space” is. Cooper begins his article as a response to Heath’s discussion of film as an extension of the Renaissance way of looking at art. Film is basically a sequence of static images that when played together in rapid pace turns a two-dimensional world into something that is identifiable to the viewer as a representation of the real world. However, what in film creates a story, or a narrative to the viewer? Cooper draws a distinction between two types of film, those with a story and those without. In a film without narrative it appears as if the camera is merely an observer. As if it was placed in an arbitrary place and people pass by it going about their normal lives. A film with narrative, Cooper argues, creates divisions of spaces between and within frames. The example he gives, which is really an excellent one, is of the silent film L’Arroseur arosse, in which the relationship between a prankster and a gardener is depicted. The important word here is relationship. According to Cooper, narrative can only be built if there is a cause and effect relationship between two distinct spaces. An action in one frame has an effect on the other. The prankster stepping on the hose in the background causes the gardener to see the water has stopped flowing in the foreground. Although this is an example of early cinema, and is produced using the long static shot characteristic of that era, the division of space between the back of the frame and the front of the frame creates a visual dialogue between the two characters. Cooper argues that the creation of spaces is not accomplished only through shots and edits, but through the organization of the mise-en-scene in the frame. This, Cooper believes, is the essence of narrative.


Now, it is important to ask ourselves if this principle still applies today. Cinema is a much more complex art form than it was previously. Technology has been invented to not only capture a variety of shots, but also to create them artificially. With the special effects capabilities in Hollywood today something can be recorded on film that didn’t even occur. So does the language of film still have the same building blocks for narrative that Cooper argues for? When answering this question, Cooper utilizes one of the most repeated stories in Hollywood; the romance. Before discussing the issue of how narrative is built in romance, it is important to define one of the concepts Cooper uses in his article. He writes,
"The looks characters exchange with one another provide both narrative and spatial information…The exchange and separation of looks animates Hollywood cinema's most common narrative pattern: the love story.” Cooper believes that these “looks” build space in the frame, and through this, build the story of most typical romance films. The two lead characters of a romance often spend the whole movie attempting to build one concrete space of “utopian love” out of the two distinct spaces that they occupy by themselves. These “looks” that Cooper refers to, can be of the characters looking anywhere, although usually out of the frame, to some unbeknownst target in the distance. This creates a feeling of desire for the viewer. We want to know what they are looking at and we feel the longing of the characters for something more. This simple idea of looks, according to Cooper, builds a space around each of the characters, and the interplay of these two distinct frames creates narrative.


A great example of the way this simple concept is used, and in my opinion, even exploited to entice and attract a movie-going audience is in the film Sleepless in Seattle. In case you haven’t seen this movie, its plot can basically be summed up in a sentence or two. Sam (Tom Hanks) and Annie (Meg Ryan) live miles away from each other. Sam has just lost his wife and Annie has just gotten engaged. Sam’s son calls in a talk radio station because he is scared about his dad’s psychological state. Sam ends up talking on the station and is known as the caller “Sleepless in Seattle.” Annie hears him on the radio, immediately has a connection with him, and tries to find him for the whole movie. The plot is ridiculous, but the movie is strangely appealing. This is because of its use of looks and spaces to generate a narrative that would otherwise not exist.


Sleepless in Seattle doesn’t have much story or events to it. The movie’s plotline can be explained only by referring to a select number of events, yet its runtime is close to two hours. Why is it that the film is appealing to so many people then? Aren’t we looking for a satisfying story when we watch a film? The beauty of Sleepless in Seattle is the way it is able to have a narrative structure without a complex plot. The very idea that a movie of this kind could exist makes it hard to contradict Cooper’s notion that narrative is not built of shots and edits but of spaces.


In the movie we have two, distinct, separated spaces that only meet for minutes at a time. Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan share only two minutes of screen time in the film, yet there is an undeniable connection and chemistry between the two actors. This is accomplished because of the alternating “looks” of the characters throughout the film. One of the best examples of this is the scene in which Annie first hears Sam on the radio. Here, we have an exact example of Cooper’s definition of narrative. Annie and Sam are present in two distinct frames, yet the two spaces have a cause and effect relationship. When Annie hears Sam’s voice on the radio, she reacts to it. She even finishes his sentence at one point, as he describes how he had a perfect wife who made everything “magic.” This connection is accomplished on film via the looks that Annie gives as she is driving and listening to the radio. For a sequence of a few minutes, shots alternate between Sam on the phone and Annie driving. Sam is looking out of the frame as he talks to the radio host, and Annie is also looking out into the distance at an unknown target. While I am not suggesting that the two are actually looking at each other, the use of this type of shot, with a focus on the face and the character looking at something out of the frame, builds a relationship between the two characters, even if one does not exist.


This goes back to Cooper’s initial example of a narrative film. Like the gardener-prankster relationship, Sam’s words have an effect on Annie, and the juxtaposition of the two spaces builds a connection that the audience can understand. The trouble is, that this juxtaposition creates a feeling of longing for the two characters to meet; to occupy the same space. Cooper points this out by explaining that a storybook romance movie cannot occur in a singular “diegetic space.” The story takes place by bringing two spaces together. Nora Ephron, the director, must have understood this, because she continually taunts the viewer by creating a space, and then destroying it. Cooper defines “spaces lovers can occupy” with a specific set of qualities. These spaces have to be evenly illuminated with no obstructions, and the scene is often done with a wider angle then normal, to fit both on the same frame. He claims that these are unique to all romance movies, and this is particularly fitting for Sleepless in Seattle since Annie has an obsession with An Affair to Remember, a classic romance movie, where the “space” is never established as one of the leads is killed. Unlike An Affair to Remember, Sleepless in Seattle does eventually build this space for its lovers, but only at the very end of the movie. After being prevented by oncoming traffic, tourists, and the distance of the continent, Annie and Sam finally find what they are looking for in the last scene of the movie. The screenplay holds off from giving not only Sam and Annie, but also the audience, what they desire, until the very last moment. They meet atop the Empire State Building and create a new space, merging their previous two spaces into one. The important part of this scene is the focus from a one shot of either Annie or Sam, to a two shot of them standing and maintaining eye contact. The entire movie is about looks, and the look that the two share at the end of the movie is one of the most important. They have no words to express what they feel, and keep eye contact even while walking away. As they move they are shot as a two shot. In this way, the camera does not separate the two of them, as they do not separate from each other. This is the most powerful moment in the film because of the way the looks merge into one.


I think the best part of watching this movie and reading the articles about narrative space, is what I got from it. I really like that Cooper can analyze a seemingly simple movie like Sleepless in Seattle and talk about it as if it is art. I don’t know if the director, Nora Ephron, knew the power of spaces, two shots, and the “look,” but if meaning about the universal language of film can be derived from a movie such as this, then I have hope for cinema as a whole. Sleepless in Seattle teaches a lot about the way a story can be told only in film. If we tried to read the screenplay as a book, it would not be nearly as effective, mostly because we would lose the idea of individual “spaces” and the “looks.”