Clayton George Wickham - final thesis

56
at the eye/camera, the viewer becomes instantly involved with the characters in the
film, causing an unexpected shock.
The second surprise that the eye/camera affords us in the sequence is that of
identity. Immediately following the girl’s swift movement and the viewer’s sudden
involvement with the narrative, she yells “Michael” and at that point, the audience
knows who they are, or rather, who they have been seeing through. Michael is not
only physically unharmed, but also the person who the young couple felt no threat
from earlier. The two were happy to let Michael roam around, without suspecting
that he could be a threat. We are known to the victim, and the victim apparently
does not even sense danger, but is more upset that we have invaded her privacy. The
stabbing that follows is aided by the sense of proximity provided by the eye/camera.
Not only does the audience feel involved with the violence, but we know exactly
how far we are from the victim: arm’s length.
J. P. Telotte writes that the opening eye/camera shot has a greater
significance within the film, pointing out that while the opening shot is firmly
situated within the first person, Carpenter then uses a different approach to the
subsequent stalking of later victims. Telotte says, “Instead of once again
subjectively forcing us to identify with the murderer, Carpenter opts for an
ambiguous camera placement, consistently locating it slightly behind or just to the
side of his ‘boogeyman’...” (120) According to Telotte, this shift places the viewer
in the position of a voyeuristic accomplice, essentially retaining the subjective
sensibility of the camerawork but moving from an existing character to a more
abstract participation. Significantly, however, the opening eye/camera shot
establishes a subjectivity which permeates the entire film. Whether the shot is
housed within Michael or near Michael, the viewer understands the overall