directing The Art of the Reveal

I've noticed that recently I hear less and less about what I consider a key technique of direction and cinematography, the reveal shot. This is not in reference to plot reveals, I'm talking about camera moves that are orchestrated to provide key pieces of information to the viewer in a sequence. This is a well known technique, and it's one of the differences between great direction, and more pedestrian efforts.

I'll give an example. The camera begins on a hand, fingers wrapping around the hilt of a handgun concealed in bag. The shot pulls out to reveal that the owner of the hand is an elderly woman with a frightened expression on her face, it pulls out once again until you can see that she is sitting in the back row of a courtroom where a trial is taking place.

I was just curious as to how many of you use reveals in your films, if you have any shots you'd like to share, or if you have a favorite reveal from a movie.
 
I just started a script. In the opening scenes, a jeep / van enters through a gate, then pulls out to reveal the police station, zooms in to other part of the screen revealed (to the name board of the police station). This is done to create connect to the flashback. Not sure how that idea would be transforming to finally.
I feel this may be used scarcely once or twice in a full-length film.
 
I just started a script. In the opening scenes, a jeep / van enters through a gate, then pulls out to reveal the police station, zooms in to other part of the screen revealed (to the name board of the police station).
This feels a little bit heavy-handed to me.
My personal preference would be to have the jeep/van enter through the gate and the sign with the police station name is visible but illegible.
As the jeep/van gets closer, the words gradually become legible.
 
I just started a script. In the opening scenes, a jeep / van enters through a gate, then pulls out to reveal the police station, zooms in to other part of the screen revealed (to the name board of the police station). This is done to create connect to the flashback. Not sure how that idea would be transforming to finally.
I feel this may be used scarcely once or twice in a full-length film.
It's not something to use in every scene of course, but some genres/directors use it dozens of times in a single film. It's a good technique for visual storytelling, but the key is that not every reveal shot needs to be a big deal. In the example I gave, it's a very intense and memorable shot, and you would likely be right about only doing that once or twice in a film. It's very heavy handed as Mara was saying. What's a lot more useful in day to day work is much less dramatic reveals, that simply feed the viewer pieces of information in a timing sequence.

Here's a couple of simple examples of lower intensity reveals that you will see used quite often, from certain directors.

A medium intensity reveal, a character is standing in a line, looking at their watch, and talking on their phone, and as they talk the camera pulls out to reveal that the line they are standing in is long. In this way you've wordlessly communicated that the character is stuck there for a while.

A more common, low intensity reveal type is a simple focus pull, or even more common an audio reveal. You hear two people talking as the camera shows a coffee maker filling a mug, then the next shot shows that the conversation is happening in a psychiatrists office, simply revealing their location. If you start actively watching, or listening for it, you will note editors doing this all the time. Simply start the audio for scene 2 while the end of shot 1 is playing. As an audience member you're barely conscious of it happening, but what is happening here is that for a moment they are intentionally raising questions in the viewers mind (where are these voices or sounds coming from), and then quickly answering those questions. This is the same psychological ploy that makes focus pulls such an effective technique.

Basically, the big thing is to realize that a reveal doesn't have to be high impact. In a conversation, a focus pull can be used to simply reveal a persons facial expression as they react to the last line spoken. I have better luck thinking of it as more of basic storytelling mechanic than as a special effect.
 
This feels a little bit heavy-handed to me.
My personal preference would be to have the jeep/van enter through the gate and the sign with the police station name is visible but illegible.
As the jeep/van gets closer, the words gradually become legible.
Or even more natural reveals, like, pulling up to a non-descript building that could be anything, and after he parks (engine shuts off) use the sound of two police officers leaving the building (keys jangling, then, police radio), and you cut to inside the station where the action is taking place without ever showing a sign or cops. It's also a little mysterious with the sound only, and acts as a reveal conduit.
 
The reason I say that this is a key technique, is that if you think about it, every story is just a sequence of reveals. It's the basic building block of all drama. You raise questions (will they or won't they is a common one, or in Agatha Christie's case "whodunnit") and then reveal the answers. The rest of the work is building interest in those questions. Will Andy Dufrene ever get out of Shawshank? You wonder, and that's a part of what drives you to watch till the end. Still, everyone in that prison might well have the same question attached, and no one cares whether the inmate 3 places down the lunch table ever gets out. Getting the viewer to care about that character is what creates interest in that question over time. If you succeed, the audience will watch the film to the end to find out. It's still that question, and the reveal of it's answer that's driving people.

Personally I think of quick, low key reveals as just very small versions of the exact same thing as you see across an entire film. This pattern is seen in nature via the Mandelbrot fractal. The small moments sustain interest seconds at a time, while you build interest in the large moments.

 
Last edited:
I also believe good reveals can add realism instead of throwing things in people's faces. They can unfold naturally or never even be truly revealed, if done right. In other words you do it so well you don't even need to explain it... it's a weave of storytelling.
 
That's exactly right. Everyone says show don't tell, but they seldom talk about the nuts and bolts of how that is achieved. A good filmmaker weaves their plot via a tapestry of seamlessly interconnected techniques, in most cases, the more subtle the better.

I'm watching this indie film right now as I write this, called "The Lost Treasure", just came out yesterday, for some unknowable reason, it's near the top of the global charts today. And this is a great example of a film with zero nuance. There is no flow or tapestry whatsoever, so it's like if you were producing audio, and never used any crossfades or EQ. Every scene just hits you in the face with whatever they want to show you next.

For contrast, lol, watch any good movie or series. GOT, Sopranos, Anything by Scorsese, Kubrick, Attenborough, Hitchcock, etc. Nuance is by definition subtle, but when you take it away it becomes super obvious.
 
I wouldn't say all, but certainly many. You are basically correct. Everyone knows that the script tells a story, but it's also important to know that the camera is also telling the story. You see a lot of conversations where people are arguing that story is more important than cinematography, or that sound is more important than color, etc. This is an incorrect mentality. Good results come from an understanding of harmony between elements. It would be like saying that one note or another was more important in a chord. Maybe that root note is more significant on some level, but if you play the song without the harmonies, it's just not any good.

If you took the script from the Matrix and removed the color grade, it tells a somewhat different story. That can be hard to grasp at first, but it's true. Imagine Led Zeppelin's "The Rain Song" played with Megadeath's bombastic distortion. The notes are all the same, but the effect of the song is totally different.
 
In my christmas movie i designed a reveal for showing the main character outside of her wig and costume for the first time.
had to make sure the audience was expecting to see her otherwise some ppl wouldnt recognize that it was the same person
 
That's a good use of a reveal, create expectations (the look of the character) and then subvert them later. Adds interest to the story. When you do a shot like that with a costume removal, it paints the character's personality in a way that would be difficult verbally.
 
Back
Top