Path's Of Glory: Stanley Kubrick

At a young age of eight, David Fincher’s passion for cinema grew when he saw the movie Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (1969). Born in 1962 Denver, Colorado, David Fincher moved to Ashland, Oregon in his teens, where he graduated from Ashland High School. Much of his time here, he directed plays, designed sets, and managed lighting after school. Until one summer, he and a friend attended the Berkley Film Institute’s summer program, where he hoped to learn film as a true art form but instead learned only the technical production. Either way he was happy to engage is this and as his early film industry career started, he was a production assistant at his local television news station. Years went by as he directed propaganda films then moving on to becoming a well-known music director before his first movie feature debut Aliens 3 in 1992. However, the American director David Fincher didn’t become a modern 21st century visionary until his creation of the film Se7en (1995). The huge success after this film started Fincher’s popularity in the film industry. From there he continued to make ironic movies we know today, such as: Fight Club (1999), Zodiac (2007), The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008), The Social Network (2010), Gone Girl, and The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.

A long time ago in a galaxy far far away The Movie Brats were at the top of the film industry, producing new blockbusters every year. The Movie Brats were a group of directors who were changing the film industry with their blockbuster movies American New Wave movement in the American film industry. The directors who made the most impact during this time period were no other than Francis Ford Coppola, George Lucas, John Milius, Brian De Palma, Steven Spielberg, Paul Schrader. Now will we only look into these three directors Francis Ford Coppola, George Lucas and also the great Steven Spielberg. All of these directors have created some of the greatest films in the film industry from “American Graffiti, Mean Streets, The Conversation, Jaws, Taxi

Alfred Hitchcock is widely regarded as a prime example of an auteur, a theory that emerged in the 1950s by Truffaut, in the ‘politique des auteurs’ of Cahiers du Cinema (Tudor 121). The auteur theory, as defined by Andrew Tudor, is premised on the assumption that “any director creates his films on the basis of a central structure”(140) and thus, if you consider their films in relation to each other, commonalities can be found within them. These commonalities work to demonstrate the view of the director as “the true creator of the film” (Tudor 122). Evidence of an auteur can be found in examining a director’s creative tendencies, in their distinctive themes and motifs, stylistic choices,

Anyone who is even vaguely aware with film usually has a favorite director. Why? What distinguishes one director from another? A director is “the person who determines and realizes on the screen an artistic vision of the screenplay; casts the actors and directs their performances; works closely with production design in creating the look of the film…and in most cases, supervises all postproduction activity, especially editing” (Barsam and Monahan 496). Clearly, the director of a film is lead visionary in how the film is made. But what makes some directors truly memorable and instantly recognizable? Those directors take advantage of all different kinds creative possibilities and signatures to become the true “author” of the film, also known

Lukas Hamlescher Dr. Neuendorf COM 320 Preliminary Draft Wes Anderson is a staple in the independent film community. He writes, directs, and produces most of his films. He takes time to develop stories unique to him and from each other. Nonetheless, all of Anderson?s films have an undeniable familiarity between them as he imprints his style on everything he creates. However, if he did not have inspiration or influences for his films, his creativity and artistic flair may not have a proper way to be displayed.

Being one of the world’s most popular art forms, it was inevitable that these archetypes would find their way into film as well. In this essay I will argue that the

As one of the most widely acclaimed and influential directors of the postwar era, Stanley Kubrick enjoyed a reputation and a standing unique among the filmmakers of his day. He had a brilliant career with relatively few films. An outsider, he worked beyond the confines of Hollywood, which he disliked, maintaining complete control of his projects and making movies according to his own ideas and time constraints. To him, filmmaking was a form of art and unlike Hollywood, not a business.

It had been a hot, midsummer day when Jacques Kubrick bestowed a camera upon his son, Stanley. It had been an old, Graflex camera, and from that day forward, young Stanley could be seen lugging around his father’s gift everywhere he went. He spent much of his time snapping still photos and creating home movies depicting the Bronx, his hometown, in all its glory (Uhlich). No one could have predicted that this gift was one that would affect the world. That day - July 26th, 1941 - had been renowned American filmmaker, director, and screenwriter Stanley Kubrick’s thirteenth birthday, and it had been a ripple in time, the simple start of a visionary whose future work would one day be celebrated on various platforms by more than one generation. As

Alfred Hitchcock is arguably the greatest director of all time. Many of his films are considered standards of American cinema and inspired many of today’s directors. Even though Hitchcock is known as timeless director, he had an understanding of philosophy that was beyond his time. Hitchcock had a brilliant perception as to how the mind works and human reaction. Hitchcock’s understanding of philosophy can be seen in his film Vertigo and illustrates how many theories can be debilitating in everyday life.

The auteur theory holds that a director's hand is clearly and consistently evident in their work, regardless of involvement in the rest of the production process. It's not uncommon for artists to have a signature or quirk--- Author Stephen King uses simplistic writing and significant world building to frame his often dark and fantastical stories, and some painters choose to put their own hair or saliva into their work rather than a signature. In the same way, an auteur's films have an instantly recognizable atmosphere, motif, or even color palette--- and, just as importantly, such an impression can give insight into an auteur's life and mind, lending that much more weight to a body of work. Two such auteurs are thriller and suspense master

The term Auteur seems to bless a privileged group of filmmakers with an almost messiah-like legacy. Men such as Alfred Hitchcock, John Ford and Fritz Lange are believed to inhabit the ranks of the cinematic elite, and not surprisingly most critics are more than willing to bestow upon them the title of Auteur. By regarding filmmaking as yet another form of art, Auteur theory stipulates that a film is the direct result of its director's genius. With the emerging prominence of auteur based criticism in the 1950?s, the role of the director became increasingly integral to a film's success. However most would argue that this form of criticism didn't reach its apex until 1960s, when Andrew Sarris released his

The romantic idea of the auteur is described by film theoretician, André Bazin, observing the film form as an idealistic phenomenon. Through the personal factor in artistic creation as a standard reference, Bazin primarily refers to an essential literary and romantic conception of the artist as central. He considers the relationship between film aesthetics and reality more important than the director itself and places cinema above paintings. He described paintings as a similar ethical creation to film stating a director ‘can be valued according to its measurements and the celebrity of the signature, the objective quality of the work itself was formerly held in much higher esteem.’ (Bazin, 1967: 250). Bazin contemplates the historical and social aspects that indeed hinder a director’s retribution to their own personalised film, thus en-companying their own ideological judgement upon the world ‘more so in cinema where the sociological and historical cross-currents are countless.’ (Bazin, 1967: 256)

When it comes to movies, many directors are good at their jobs. However, other directors are great in the art of film making. There is no doubt such statement is considered utterly subjective, but what would life be without subjectivity, for it is our differences that make us thrive against a monotonic existence. By the same token, Alfred Hitchcock and Christopher Nolan utilize their singularities to create films that for decades have impacted the movie making universe. In fact, it is their differences that provide us with a high contrast to compare and scrutinize their job and find what made them great at it.

The art of film made it’s way into the penetration stage around the turn of the century and remained there until

Buz Luhrmann’s intention in making movies is to provide and entertaining, extravagantly beautiful film, and he succeded in the making of these two films.