One of the most fascinating people in film to look at through the lens of Auteur Theory is Charlie Kaufman. The films he wrote before beginning directing are more attributed to him rather than their directors. This is partially because Kaufman is so damn good at writing dialogue that he gets a lot of credit being screen writer, but also that he had a very direct style right from the start. He kind of reminds me of Wes Anderson, in that each film is a more refined version of his last. But yeah, i find it fascinating that Kaufman earned Auteur status well before he became a director, that mans a genius.
Kudos. This is setting the record straight on the auteur theory which attempted in the 60s to rectify the erroneous focus on the stars by creating an erroneous focus on a selection of directors found worthy of mention. But film was and remains a collaborative enterprise. Good job, Gisriel.
I would say that even though auteurmanship is still always collaborative effort, the auteur director's vision is found through who he works with. John Carpenter often works with actors like Kurt Russel and Tom Atkins because their acting style fits well with his vision. Steven Spielberg often works with John Williams because Williams's grandiose scores match with Spielberg's intentions. In other words, collaboration doesn't negate the idea of auteurmanship.
+The Open Rift he doesn't but I think other autermanships or which ever should be mentioned as well. Everyone who worked on it added to that and let to making it what it was. I also wanted to show that, that can be limiting while understanding film. I have issues with it but I still think it's an important theory on how we view and judge cinema and you have to go with it to a certain degree
the problem with what you say is that a director (an auteur) can decide what music to use, how to tell a story, which cinematographer will shoot. That is why a director is more important than a music composer in a film, he is the common nexus.
A director is the common nexus however the choices that a composer or a cinematopher brings are still there own. They are still showing there voice as well. the directors voice might be the most prominent but it is not the only one
Brilliant use of clips and fantastic video, Jim. I'd love more of these. Do you have a favorite "auteur" director with recognizable trademarks that appeal to you the most?
vague, you can't apply Auteur Theory to every director and all in the production team. there is only a small group of Auteurs that hold the title by being true artists, and making cinema into an art form on its own.
This video was pretty dope. As I have said I am a Hong Kong cinema fan and since becoming a fan I have began to notice more of the people in the background. Since many of the stuntmen action choreographers composers and cinematographers appear on camera from time to time and not just in cameos. I often mistake them as actors then I check through there credits and I'm like shit Lowell Lo composed for Love and the City, An Autumn's Tale, People's Hero, Prison on Fire I&II, and Wild Search I thought he was just a funny sidekick character actor. Or in the case of Eric Tsang I find out that though he is mostly known as an actor and a great one at that he also helped in the formation of D&B Films, Cinema City, and he was a founder on U.F.O Films plus he wrote such classics 36th Chambers, All the Wrong Clues, and My Lucky Stars. Hell even a small time character actor like Lee Siu-Kei helped write and produce many of films. It makes me realize just how multi talented some people can be. But back to what you said in the video I agree with you I never believed the whole auteur thing but I will say that before I started watching Hong Kong films I often didn't consider the background people I mean I knew of them but I never looked them up to see their other works which in retrospect is pretty shitty I mean I never would have looked up Marco Mak before but I got curious to see what other movies he worked on as an editor besides the Tsui hark films then I find out he is a director and thanks to me finding that out I was able to see A Gambler's Story 2001 which is one of my favorite films and Wo Hu 2006 which is pretty damn good too. I really hope people start looking at who works behind the scenes and what they do because I have grown to have a great appreciation for them because sometimes they are the ones who make a film great plus they may have other achievements as well. Hey I just wrote a fucking essay I am so sorry I really got to stop but not before saying Juwanna Man now or maybe later tomorrow seems good.
Just wanted to clarify that Lee Siu-Kei is great and I did not mean to call him small time as an insult he is better than that. He is one of the best and most memorable character actors in Hong Kong and should be respected as such. My bad.
A little thing. In french Auteur means the scriptwiter. He creates the concept. In cinema it's mean the director is also the scriptwriter. I'm not a big fan of Nolan but he is a Auteur in this way. In his films he talks about his obsessions. I'm not saying that his obsessions are universal or that they deserve to be put on the screen. But that's it actually. More than a style it is "himself" that the auteur speaks of. It's like in music when the performer makes the music and the lyrics. In France we said Auteur/Compositeur/Interprete or Lirics writer/compositor/performer. Bob Dylan will always be an "higher/most complete artist" than Madonna.
What film is 0.46 ? ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-dzTRjsefTXc.html , the bit where there is an explosion behind the partners walking?
This is pretty good, but for the noticeable omission of actors as important to the impact of a film--would Taxi Driver be Taxi Driver if De Niro hadn't played the lead? Evidently actors have no impact of the resultant film as artists. The need to prove that an art form is truly artistic and the approach to film criticism as if actors were functioning machines that are irrelevant to artistic production all harkens back to the impact of modernism. Film is a little late to the game because it arrived later on the scene, but Edward Gordon Craig was writing about actors as puppets as part of his directorial vision as early as 1908 ("The Actor and the Ubermarionette"). Highbrow Lowbrow by Levine is also a great reference on the need modernists felt to identify a solo romantic genius/auteur in order to qualify an art form as art (he discusses it in reference to the struggles of photographers to get photography acknowledged as art). But you're absolutely correct to identify part of the bias against film as an art form is its collaborative nature, because modernists (and postmodernists) believe that artistic production has to emanate from the mind of the solo artistic genius (auteur) to qualify as "art."
Cool vid Jim, however I think what's important is the sincerity, effort, and creativity of the director, that doesn't even require quality, like Tommy Wisseau I consider Tommy Wisseau as an Auteur, even from one movie, people can understand Tommy as a person somewhat with that movie, as it's so unique despite it lack of quality I read "The Disaster Artist", Tommy funded the movie and had complete control of the project, an auteur but not a great director which by the way is a counterargument I have the disagreement with the auteur desite movie collaborative format, directors direct and employs people with other specific creative skills and ultizes them usually as best they can in service of a director specific style
I mean I know what you mean but I've seen cases where the movie was saved by someone other than the director. Prime example that comes to mind is probably Lo Wei he was a very neglectful director and often time his input hindered the film Bruce Lee said that the times he wasn't paying attention because he was drunk he often took over role as director same thing goes for Jackie Chan when he worked with him. Also Tsui Hark since he usually guided the films he produced more than some of his directors then again he was a director in his own right so he must've had a vision for each film he worked on regardless if he directed it. Still I do think you have a valid point but I don't think that it is always the case that director does all the heavy lifting by managing the whole film.
Yeah like that. Sorry I have been watching nothing but Hong Kong cinema for the last year maybe longer and save for some Japanese, Korean and American films I haven't seen much else many are bound to be confused by the names I bring up.
"A celebration of egomania, like we're going to give a rach-around to these self impressed nicotine soaked french dudes for being the most important person on a set and then invent an entire field of academia to justify it."
