Most of us have an art that we connect the most to. For example, while I may enjoy listening to poetry and looking at paintings, I have to admit I’m not someone who spends his free time going to poetry readings or new museum exhibits. Now I know a lot of people who love going to museums and make it a regular hobby. That’s fine; I’m just not someone who connects with that art-form as much or can explain what I like or dislike about it. On the other hand, I absolutely love to go to a block of short films! Living in New York and knowing of different film forums, I am happy to spend two hours just sitting back and watching eight short films, followed by Q&A’s given by the filmmakers. And I realize this doesn’t appeal to everyone. Some people just go to the movies as simple distraction and have no interest in this artistic element. But to me, film was always my dominant interest.
It really is amazing to think how young this art is and how it came about. Prior to the birth of Cinema, you had the art of Photography and the art of Theatre, which were two very separate art forms, but had both existed for centuries. And suddenly, they were fused together. And by editing images together, you could manipulate the impression of sequences occurring in a narrative. Audiences were initially just satisfied to see anything be filmed, but before long, Cinema became a storytelling device, which says a lot about the human condition. Consider the fact that cinema is a combination of several other art forms, in particular:
-Storytelling, which has obviously existed for centuries,
-Cinematography, which follows the principals of Photography
-Acting, which overlaps with the theatre, but is slightly different.
-Musical Score, a humongous part of experience, which sadly many amateur filmmakers ignore.
-Costumes, Set Design, etc
-Editing, which is an original creation and only exists within the greater art of Cinema.
Of course now we begin to split hairs over what art is. Does Sound Mixing count as an art? You might not think so, yet it’s one of the most vital things in the film; a movie that looks great but has horrible sound will be a failure, while a film that’s shot horribly but has clear audio will still hold an audience’s attention. So perhaps the answer is that the art is only in the final product and what the film itself has to say. And in that case, I do believe that it all comes down to Story.
Consider the television production I, CLAUDIUS, which is generally regarded as a masterpiece and the single finest of BBC productions. The low budget shows as the scenes are cheaply shot and almost every single scene is just dialog. There’s not a single sweeping shot of Rome. Yet the story still feels epic, because our minds are engrossed in the sweep of the story and fill in the gaps on their own. The bottom-line is this: no one may ever talk about the shot composition, sound mixing, or even the directing of I, CLAUDIUS, but you can bet they talk about the writing and the acting! Because when film conveys a story properly, then it succeeds!
That’s why all that really matters is what’s up on the screen. THERE WILL BE BLOOD, for example, is a great movie not because of what went on on set, what time the call sheets went out, what kind of catering they had for the crew, if the gaffer was union or not, how much the actors were paid, or how many production assistants got up at 5AM. It’s a great movie because of what we see on the screen. The combination of visuals, performances, music, and, of course, writing, all come together to offer a Storytelling experience that is very effective.
And sometimes, only at special screenings or film forums do you see filmmaking at its most raw and get that experience of art!
No comments:
Post a Comment