• kamaldeep commented on the blog post 10 years, 6 months ago

    I understand Rodowick’s reluctance to let go of a cinematic form that is undoubtedly dear to him, but I wonder about the extent to which his argument has credence. Taking into account the “infinite manipulability” that Rosen discusses in his article, I think it’s reasonable to say that with further advancement of these technologies, it […]

  • I agree that new technologies should be incorporated and used alongside older technologies and methods of filmmaking. I think this actually creates a greater sense of realism and I think this goes back to our discussion about corporeality. In Jurassic Park there was a sense that you could actually reach out and touch the dinosaurs, […]

  • Death of Cinema? Technology is a unifier. It consolidates information and data to make it more accessible and user-friendly. But at the same time, according to Anne Friedberg, it diminishes the differences between various media like tv and movies which have their own specificity and are meant to engage the viewer in different ways. With […]

  • Corporeality, Sensation, History, and Spectatorship Even from the beginning, film has evoked a visceral response from its audiences. Tom Gunning puts early films, during the era of the “cinema of attractions” before the dawn of narrative films, in their proper historical context, relating them to the magic theater and other demonstrations of illusion that aimed to […]

  • Christian Metz discusses the fact that cinema differs from the other arts in its relationship with the spectator. Unlike other art forms, which also present an object to be viewed by the subject, in cinema the object is not ever really present and is doubly represented through the acts of projection and perception. Metz uses […]

  • I was struck by the repeated reference in the readings on auteur theory to Howard Hawks and his frequent use of female characters that are just one of the guys, affectionately dubbed the Hawksian women. In my paper, I would like to try to apply ideas about gender and female perspective to examine these characters’ […]

  • kamaldeep wrote a new post, Third Cinema, on the site Film Theory 10 years, 8 months ago

    Third Cinema is an alternative to both First World Hollywood cinema and European “author” cinema (second cinema). It adopts the Second Cinema’s aesthetic opposition to Hollywood, but, according to Stephen Crofts, takes it one step further by incorporating a political opposition as well. The goal is to fight against neocolonialism and reclaim a national identity for […]

  • I agree that auteur theory is not the be all and end all of film criticism, but it does have its value. I think auteur criticism works if the director has managed to fully plumb different themes well in one film resulting in a great story while at the same time the meaning of these […]

  • I think Film is just intrinsically more personal than most other kinds of art, excepting perhaps music. Most films that aren’t experimental endeavor to show us the world we live in and the lives we lead. For this reason, we are apt to form unrealistic expectations for filmmakers based on previously experiencing their films and […]

  • I think auteur theory was a much more diffuse idea when it originated in France, until it was adopted in America by people like Sarris who tried to create a concrete, objective set of rules or guidelines by which to identify who was or wasn’t an auteur, which is after all a pretty subjective task. […]

  • It’s a strange contradiction within auteur theory as espoused by Andrew Sarris that he seems to denigrate directors who write their own films. When we think of auteur directors in the 21st century, the ones who really leave a discernible mark on their films, many of them tend to write their own films, like all […]

  • There doesn’t seem to be much consensus about what auteur theory is among critics whether they support the theory or not. In a broad view, it implies that the director of a film has the most control over the interpretation of topics and themes in a film, leaving their own distinct imprint whereby the the […]

  • Pudovkin and Eisenstein agree on the fact that editing is the most important aspect of the filmmaking process, without which film would have no meaning. What they don’t agree on is how editing can best be understood and utilized to this end. Pudovkin believes that separate shots are building blocks that, when joined together, create […]