What Is The Role Of The Forensic Homogenization Of Storytelling In The Culture?

In a 1977 interview with Steven Spielberg, the young filmmaker mused, “I think in a way I’m two different people; my instincts always commandeer my sensibilities, or my intellect is always beaten down by my instincts” (36). Spielberg’s prognosis is accurate – Spielberg’s creative instincts and business sensibilities balance each other, laying the foreground for his present prominence as both a postmodern constructor and postmodern auteur. 40 years later, today, Steven Spielberg remains one of the most highly-recognized, prolific directors in Hollywood. I argue that Spielberg is both a postmodern constructor and postmodern auteur, but

To support this idea, Bordwell illustrates how art cinema motivates its narratives differently, through two principles: realism and authorial expressivity. Firstly he proposes the notion that art films reflect realism in their characters, space, and time. Psychologically complex characters are present in real worlds dealing with true-to-life situations. Art cinema is concerned with the characters ‘reaction’ to these situations, rather than their ‘action’. Thus it bares an element of psychological subjectivity as the characters survey the world they are in, which aids the realisation of the distress of

In Jean-Louis Comolli and Jean Narboni’s essay “Cinema/Ideology/Criticism,” they put forward the central argument that film is a commercial product in the capitalist system and therefore also the unconscious instrument of the dominant ideology which produces it. In opposition to the classic film theory that applauds camera as an impartial device to reproduce reality, they argue that what the camera reproduces is merely a refraction of the prevailing ideology. Therefore, the primary and political task for filmmakers is to disrupt this replication of the world as self-evident and the function of film criticism is to identify and evaluate that politics. Comolli and Narboni then suggest seven categories of films confronting ideology in different ways, among which the second category resists the prevailing ideology on two levels. Films of this group not only overtly deal with political contents in order to “attack their ideological assimilation” (Comolli and Narboni 483), but also achieve their goal through breaking down the conventional way of depicting reality.

Although the best reasons for “going to the movies” are to be entertained and eat popcorn, understanding a film is actually quite complex. Movies are not only a reflection of life, they also have the capability of shaping our norms, values, attitudes, and perception of life. Through the media of film, one can find stories of practically anything imaginable and some things unimaginable. Movie-makers use their art to entertain, to promote political agendas, to educate, and to present life as it is, was, or could be. They can present truth, truth as they interpret it, or simply ignore truth altogether. A movie can be a work of fiction, non-fiction, or anything in-between. A film is an artist’s interpretation. What one takes away from a film depends upon how one interprets what has been seen and heard. Understanding film is indeed difficult.

Hollywood cinema also produces its own realities on the big screen. As Cecil B. De Mille. Goldfish and Samuel Goldfish claimed during the production of the first motion picture, “when real life doesn’t fit a preconceived image, create another reality” (xi). Since that 1913 statement, Hollywood has fostered this type of reality-making that results into an escape for its audiences. Aside from the physical escape of traveling to the movies or Blockbuster in order to view these films, audiences are also invested in the characters they view on screen. However, Webb informs the public that “what appears on the screen is a stylized version of real life (or a plausible vision of imaginary worlds) that is made possible by the prolonged collaborative effort of hundreds, working in support of a celebrated few” (3). The “reality” of the cinema lies in producers, directors, actors, back-lots, etc. involved in its creation rather

In any situation foreign to the character, anything and everything will be done to try to make sense of ones surroundings. The importance of identifying the type of the movies shown in “Worker Drone” by Raju, S. (2010) and “Play” by Kaplan and Zimmerman (2010) are vital to the understanding of not only the plot, but also the common themes presented. For example, common themes in both movies were was the sense of paranoia, a showcase of intertextuality and an ambiguous endings. All three common themes make it clear that these movies are in fact postmodern films, despite the fact that there were also a few common themes also found supporting a modernist and existentialist sense.

A criticism made by Adorno and Horkheimer that is still relevant to the modern movie industry is the criticism that “the people at the top are no longer so interested in concealing monopoly…Movies and radio need no longer pretend to be art” (Adorno and Horkheimer). The modern movie industry is an industry of commodities in sense, what this means is that the movies produced today are produced simply as means for profit and not as form of art. As Adorno and Horkheimer stated “the movie-makers distrust any manuscript which is not reassuringly backed by a bestseller” (Adorno and Horkheimer) this attitude can be seen by simply observing the Avengers, Spider-man and Transformers franchises. These types of movies are given top priority at movie studios simply because they are movies with large target audiences and the movie studios know that they will bring in mass amounts of profits. These types of movies often lack substance of any kind for example take the Avengers franchise, the movie itself has very little plot or characterization but it is still produced over and over again because it is a source of revenue. This is an example of how new media technologies how what Adorno and Horkheimer mean by when they say art is becoming a commodity (Adorno and Horkheimer). Another criticism found within

Cinema grants the possibility for an average citizen to escape their mundane life, and delve into a realm of fantasy. However, the film industry fails to act as an instrument in societal progression by instilling superficial ideologies. In this article “Dear Canadian filmmakers…”, Cameron Bailey suggests that Canadian filmmakers ought to shift their perspective by looking more outwards than inwards. As Bailey's emphasizes the significance of producing content that appropriately depicts contemporary Canada. Baileys draws attention to the fact that both, the audience, and the critics have a preference for “drama of real life” based films as opposed to fiction based films. Furthermore, he discusses how filmmakers tend to turn the blind eye to

    Film and literature are two media forms that are so closely related, that we often forget there is a distinction between them. We often just view the movie as an extension of the book because most movies are based on novels or short stories. Because we are accustomed to this sequence of production, first the novel, then the motion picture, we often find ourselves making value judgments about a movie, based upon our feelings on the novel. It is this overlapping of the creative processes that prevents us from seeing movies as distinct and separate art forms from the novels they are based on.

This sharp criticism of the capitalistic society may not be unique to this film, but it is poignant and powerful as ever, as we see the direct results of the company’s

What I found most interesting about this article were the examples that highlighted the corruption that some of our countries most elite production companies are guilty of. This article proves that some people will walk over others by lying and stealing all for the chance to increase their individual profits. It’s no wonder independent films are emerging alongside

In Unforgiven, the status quo of the Western genre is scrutinized for its schismatic approach that morally polarized characters and provided a mythical history of the beginning of industrialization and urbanization.The deconstruction of Old Hollywood’s mythical history has metaphorical significance as it also deconstructs a priori concepts of romanticized violence and characterizations of cultural stereotypes indoctrinated in Old Hollywood. However, the concept of deconstructing myths is a part of the revisionist Western genre history and has been done previously. Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven can be seen as revising his own Western canon. The approach this paper takes is in a tripartite: An Ode to a Western Urn (a look at how the past affects

The intention of this essay is to discuss the romantic notion of a film director who has etched their own cinematic vision into the body of their film work, and whether the theory and practice is dead and an infringement of the spectator’s imagination and is it the spectator who finds meaning in the film. I will be closely looking at critical material, primarily André Bazin and Roland Barthes and applying them to several case study films directed by Christopher Nolan including The Following (1998), The Prestige (2006) and Inception (2010), to examine whether Nolan possesses the qualities of an auteur and if so, does that imply an ideological view of what the auteur resembles or an artistic one.

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.

According to film theorist Thomas Schatz, “a genre approach (to film) provides the most effective means for understanding, analyzing, and appreciating the Hollywood cinema (Schatz vii).” His approach to film is strongly supported by theorist Edward Branigan’s and the narrative representation of character interaction (Branigan), and André Bazin’s arguments that the objective reality pressed against audience interpretation.