In 2011 Peter Mullan wrote and directed his critically acclaimed film ‘NED’s’. Ned; being a derogatory term used in Scotland to describe hooligans, louts or petty criminals. Such usage in Glasgow dates back to the 1960s and earlier. The film follows the story of a young John McGill; who goes from prize winning school boy to knife wielding maniac. After struggling with the low expectations of those around him, events take a maddening turn as he descends into shocking violence on a mission of self-destruction. Set in Glasgow 1972, Mullan explores the harsh reality young boys faced when living in an area fuelled by gang culture, territory and violence. This Clydeism representation of Scotland and the Scottish is not for the faint hearted.
This essay will explore Mullan’s film in relation to the semiotics theory, a concept whose foundations were laid by linguist and semiotician Ferdinand De Saussure. Ferdinand splits the theory into two sections, the first being signs, in relation to NED’s the sign of a knife would signify violence. Something becomes a sign when our attention is drawn towards it in order to understand meaning. Ferdinand recognises that there are 3 types of sign; icon, index and symbol. The second part is what the signs signify; a concept, a reaction to an object, a psychological response. Other terminology Ferdinand uses within the theory are Metaphoric meaning, Metonymy and Synecdoche.
A bitter McGill experiences his first exposure to knife crime when in the boy’s toilets at school. The setting for the first bought of violence could be a sign of its dank and unappealing nature and outcome. The moulded, mint tiled walls, sealed windows and confined cubicles could be a suggestive sign of a prison cell, a direct result of this kind of behaviour and life. As a fight breaks out between two groups of students, McGill takes shelter in the cubicle but the weapon is flung under the door. This leads to a poignant scene in the film, as John takes the knife back to his home, he stands poised in front of the mirror unable to decide how to hold it best and what hand would be strongest for the weapon. The symbol of a mirror within film has been a device used by film makers for generations, representing a sign of reflection and duality. Lacan’s devised ‘Mirror Stage Theory’ points to a moment in the development of an infant in which her/his encounter with a mirror image reinforces a sense of completeness as a human subject. This sense of wholeness, for Lacan, conceals or disguises the fundamental split enacted in humans as a result of our acquirement of language, which either tells too little or too much and can causes a fundamental rift between the subject’s ego and unconscious. In McGill’s case, Mullan could be using the mirror to signify a change in his character, this is the moment he turns from a boy to a man, and the mirror allows him to look forward into this foreshadowing image of the future. The duality of the mirror also should not be ignored. As he stands in the mirror surrounded by his childhood bedroom the reflection does not allow this to be seen, only his brute body, again emphasising the metaphor of duality. However, the distance placed between where the mirror stands and where he does is an iconic representation that this foreshadowing and turbulent future the mirror portrays is still far away enough that John can get out and turn back, the school boy persona is not lost just yet.
Mullan also uses harsh and unflattering overhead light, which glistens down on the knife and ignites the first time the audience associate John with knife crime violence. This choice of lighting could signify a spot light, all eyes being on John, questioning his motives and thought process at this time. Knives are also common signs within films, often the most poignant reference to violence and blood thirst. The look of a knife, with its blunt, stubby, dark coloured handle could be a reference to the blunt numbness of the person who holds it, such as McGill’s disposition. This is juxtaposed with the glistening, sharp, threatening other end which leaves nothing to the imagination. Throughout time knives have been a means of survival, and within film this is portrayed in more ways than one. Whilst some films utilise it as a means of survival in bare and baron lands, Mullan has metaphorically referred to it as a means of survival in the urban wilderness of Scottish gang culture. Whilst McGill’s character could employ the weapon of a knife as means of protection he could also quite easily inflict pain, revenge and sacrifice, which are three powerful signifiers of the image. The mise-en-scene in this scene, such as bunk beds and childlike drawings of planes on the wall juxtapose against the emerging thug who inhabits it. This childlike setting is a synecdoche for McGill’s lost childhood, a boy once consumed by drawing planes and school work is now only concerned with being a threat. As John stands in front of the mirror, the cinematography portrays him through a medium low angle shot, a suggestion of his developing superiority. The framing however doesn’t consider him the focus, as he stands at the side of the screen opposed to the mirror on the opposite side of the screen, perhaps symbolising his distance from this new thuggish portrayal. He stands docile in his school uniform, with his tie done up to the top and sweater neatly tucked in, is this the last we will see of this prize winning school boy? The uniform Mullan has chosen signifies that McGill did take school seriously and was thought of as the model student. Costume is of huge importance to the building of a character not only as a person but in relation to their environment also. Sarah Street’s ‘Costume and Cinema’ (Wallflower Press, 2002) states costume both “asserts and complicates notions of realism and authenticity, and also conveys information about class and sexuality”. Whereas Therese Andersson: Costume Cinema and Materiality: defines Costume design as “conceptualizing, creating and defining the personalities of the characters, and are therefore intended to embody the psychological, social and emotional condition of the character at a particular moment in the screen- play”. Thus It can make them believable, which is hugely important within a social realism film where the aim is to allow the audience to connect and believe the character’s story of events. Thus, as John uncomfortably places the knife through his belt hole in his corduroy trousers, anxiously close to his own skin, it is painfully obvious that this is not something which comes naturally to him as of yet. As he continues his stance in the low angle shot, he messes with his neatly kempt hair, roughing his school boy look, a symbol of the rough violence which pursues. As he slams the knife into his bedroom floor, it is suggestive that he is cutting away from his childhood and innocent school boy persona, which is another signifier of the knife symbol, perhaps practising for the events to come.
This is a seemingly tame projection of foreshadowing violence as in a later scene we are propelled in to reality as McGill not only stands holding a knife, but is taping two to his hands, in a bid to be totally indestructible, unable to be disarmed. Thus the first scene analysed is a metaphoric representation of what is to come and what the audience now watch unfold. His chubby, childlike, yet masculine, topless body is disconnected as he is shot from a medium angle only showing his waist and lower arms. This is a very specific framing decision by Mullan, perhaps to distance McGill from the audience in terms of them understanding his mind set, as we have no facial expression or emotion at this point. Instead the shot is much more focused on the calculated movement of his hands as he twirls them in duct tape. John is stuck fighting between his childhood and adolescence which is shown when he moves forward in the same child hood bedroom pictured before. However now the tape is attached to the bunk beds, twizzling round his stumpy hands, the black duct tape signifies John’s strength and his unwillingness to be disarmed, seeming more steady and poised than in the last scene. The lighting for the scene is extremely dark and dim, as he is only lit by the blurred moonlight outside, this is suggestive that McGill is ruled by the mystery and darkness of the night, his behaviour and mind set is only suited to such a deceiving time. However, it further raises the question what is going to happen and what are McGill’s exact intentions? As there are now two knives opposed to just one earlier, the seriousness of their danger and what they connote is doubled. The knives glimmer still in the low light as the torturous twists of his hands signify McGill spiralling out of control.
The final scene of NED’s is a very complex and peculiar display of visual imagery. As Kanta Brown; a boy who McGill previously smashed over the head with a concrete slab resulting in mental disability, is led by the hand, surrounded by a pack of loose and wild lions. The first visually striking element is the two boys holding hands, this is a symbol of unity, leadership and compassion, in a time when boys were forced to be masculine, strong and tough this is a rather foreign image, especially to the likes of a violent McGill. The innocent act of holding hands is reiterated by the mise-en-scene and how Kanta and John are dressed. The school uniform exteriorly signifies them as young, innocent, childlike young boys, who have strayed from the classroom. As mentioned earlier costume is of huge importance particularly within the social realism genre, thus Mullan has kept the uniform as a consistence theme and symbol referenced to perhaps to reiterate the prize winning school boy McGill started off as. The location has made a drastic change, there are no more paved streets, graffiti covered walls or dirty flats only trees, fresh air and countryside. The location change and action within the scene could be an indication that John is leaving the pack, the violence and the destruction, which is signified by walking through the lions. As him and Kanta walk through unharmed and untouched it suggests that he can’t be hurt by the violence anymore, he is no longer concerned with making himself known as the violent character he began to be. Presented with a new form of a gang, a pride of lions, he has met his match. Primarily nocturnal; lions signify strength but also wisdom and authority, perhaps why Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer use it as their logo for the company. As the natural lighting and still, unbroken, wide angle shot allows us to see the boys walk into the distance and smaller into the frame, the lions are unstirred, they allow the two to pass through, with one even moving aside for them. The length of the shot also allows us to see John take a long look back at the pack and stare at the dominant male who passes through. This signifies John perhaps looking back and reflecting on himself, on what he used to be and how he used to be viewed, as this dominant symbol of power, yet in comparison in the shot, John is minuscule in this ambiguous ending. In conclusion Mullan’s film exposes the ugly truth about Scottish gang culture and the consequences for young boys caught up in its lure. A vast visual experience, not least with the spiralling violence of McGill but equally the compelling urban location which entraps the characters. Thus Mullan uses visual imagery to portray Scottish gang culture by using symbols and signifiers such as knives to suggest blood thirst violence, mirrors to suggest reflection and duality and lions to suggest strength and a metaphoric representation of a gang. Social realism allows Mullan to authentically connect a character such as McGill with the audience through relatable and understandable emotional outbursts fuelled by family issues, school and peer pressure. McGill was a cleverly formed and developed character, an interesting persona to depict through semiotics, perhaps impossible to truly define what he himself signifies in the films message. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Chapter in a Book Christian Metz’s. (1960 – 1970) ‘Identification Mirror’, from ‘The Imaginary Signifier’. http://ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/UF/E0/04/30/10/00001/jurgess_t.pdf Wallflower Press Sarah Street. (2002) ‘Costume and Cinema’ http://sensesofcinema.com/2002/book-reviews/costume/ Theory Reference Therese Andersson. ‘Costume Cinema and Materiality’ http://www.cultureunbound.ep.liu.se/v3/a09/cu11v3a9.pdf