cinema history?

[mdifilm]

...see here is a good example of that.

When you say {X-Men} is treated as though western culture is full of thinking they are better than anyone: Does that mean: because the X-Men have "superior powers"? Because the reason why I liked the X-Men idea, is because of an underlying anti-racism attitude. The word 'mutant' has very few positive connotations and the characters are ostracized. I guess here the cultural line between 'superiority' and 'persecution' are pretty fuzzy.

No understanding of the culture leads to alot of misinterpretation....

-- spinner

hey Spinner, I was meaning the x-men as a whole in movie wise, not as the insight if they have power or not, but in Asia, they would see it as t"hese is a western movies that trying to make themselves look more they are superior than anyone else", they wouldn't care about the plot or whatnot...

Recently I was involved in a production where we shot a manufacturing company, in a scene, we showed a bunch of motors... For the script, it's tryint to say that these motors were made, tested and used to make healthy machines for families... And that the thought was to help provide a healthier family environemnet... (saving you the whole detail of what this is about)...

Now, when this video was shown in Asia, the ONLY thing they see is that the showing of motors means that a lot of motors were made and that the company is making a lot of $.

Totally different from the original intention of these motors were shown.

So yeah, like I said, world history in cinema is good to know, but if you don't know the culture, it's useless.

 

[NicklausLouis]

IMHO anyone who doesn't think and study cinema history in some fashion won't ever ascend above the level of some guy/girl with a camera. If you want to make movies, you study movies in some fashion...even if you don't realize you're doing it. Whether it's catching some BHS featurette on HBO or on a DVD or watching their favorite actor or director give an interview on Letterman or Leno.

I guess what I'm saying is that you probably won't get many dissenting voices on this one.

On understanding world cinema:

I have to admit that I have very little understanding of the majority of it. I have seen a lot of influential foreign films -- the ones THEY tell you to watch, but I don't place it as a high priority. I'm not sure if I am right or wrong in doing so. But I think it's an important discussion.

 

[John@Bophe]

IMHO anyone who doesn't think and study cinema history in some fashion isn't ever gonna ascend above the level of some guy/girl with a camera.

...you probably won't get many dissenting voices on this one.

Okay, well...here's one (with all due respect, Mr. Pink! )

No artist is under any obligation to study the history of his/her craft, nor is it a requirement to do so in order to have an impact on the craft and on society.

I would venture a guess that the original Delta bluesmen of the United States did not have a familiarity with many different styles of music throughout history. Likewise, members of the 70s punk movement would also probably scoff at such a claim.

Peter Bogdanovich intently studied the work of the early film "masters," yet he was criticized ealry in his career for failing to infuse his films with any sense of originality -- rather he was noted as creating "copy-cat" film that mimic the looks/styles of specific former directors.

(just to stir the pot a little... )

 

[Spatula]

There is no history. There is no future. There is only right now. Thought that is transcribed into words or pictures or audio is a record of the "now" that was. The only reason we know of the past is through records, and the only reason we know of the future is because we know of the past.

In my opinion, true art in film is when some essence of the "now" is captured. Whether it be dramatic scene or concert clips or documentaries or news clips or comedic animation... if it invokes a memory which SURVIVES the moment of "now", then you've captured the past, in a way. Even if it's all fiction and performances, it's a real moment.

Now do you need to know of the past to understand the now? Not really... by knowing the past, you might look too far into the future and be unable to stay in the now! Then, suddenly now never happens and you become stuck in the past. So I say, to hell with it. I'm going to go get some tasty-ass burgers down at Licks.

 

[barnaclelapse]

Good to see no one's voted for the fourth one...

 

[Spatula]

OK, the burger was REALLY tasty. Just wanted to let everyone know. MMMMM.

 

[clive]

Both Spatula and Poke picked up on the point I was making... which is that film history doesn't really exist, except as a point of view or a cultural perspective.

Poke hit the nail on head when he says he's watched the international films that you're supposed to watch. Film history is the same... there are "significant" films and significant movements which some people believe make up film history.

So, for instance, when Sonnyboo talks about the Russian film industry's contribution to cinema being "editing technique" this stems from film historian's pre-occupation with "The Battleship Potemkin"... which is fine, but the work of Sergei Eisenstein is only one small fragment of Russian film production. Russian film makers are some of the world's greatest cinematographers... and until the fall of the Soviet Union Prague was where all the best people trained.

The same is true of French "Nouvelle Vague" and Kurosawa... people trot them out as significant aspects of film history... but at the same time other movements and the work of other writers and directors fade into obscurity. And yet, as I said earlier, Nouvelle Vague is much less interesting than Cinema du Luc... anyone who watches "Breathless" and then watches either "Diva" or "Subway" is going to realise that Goddard's film isn't anywhere near as interesting or enjoyable.

The original question in this thread was "how important is a study of film history to a film maker?"... My response to that is another questions "Whose version of film history?"

What bothers me is people believe that merely by watching a few German Expressionist, a handful of Nouvelle Vague, one Russian film made in 1905, a couple of UK films made in the 1960's, five Kurosawa films (Seven Samurai, Hidden Fortress, Yojimbo, Gate of Rashomon and Ran) that they have a perspective both on cinema history and world cinema... when in fact all they've done is follow the paper trail set by a group of academics whose agenda is to put American cinema history into some kind of perspective.

As someone born and raised in the UK, my perspective on film history is different. Basically, after the second world war the Hollywood studios bought up almost every single cinema chain in Europe. Once they owned and controlled the distribution networks they systematically starved out all the major European studios and film producers.

Before the war the UK, France, Germany and Italy were all major film production centres. In the pre-war period it was Europe that was the major creative strong hold for film...and Hollywood was a parasite that lived off the talent produced there. Post war Hollywood was the only game in town... and the current dire state of film making is a result of that.

If indie film making means we have to operate outside of the studio system, then it should also give us the freedom to take our influences from outside of the conventional story of film history, which is exactly what some directors have done. Tarantino has built his entire career on a geeky obsession with Asian Cinema.

 

[knightly]

I'm currently taking A film history course, so I may be looking at the term history differently than it's being referenced here.

For me as a filmmaker, the historical context of the films and their relevance therin (this is the specific definition of film history in the field of film studies) isn't as important as exposure. I don't need to know Porter or Griffith to know that using editing to tell a story can greatly impact the emotions of an audience. I know from watching films that I generally have a stronger affinity for the connection to character that tighter framing gives without having to learn about the 1950's studio system and their rules of continuity editing.

I don't have to know the reasons behind the french new wave movement to know that I can't stand watching films from it.

That being said, as a film geek and a film student...I love knowing those things. I said moderately important as well.

 

[TheMoviesClub]

Mutual Appreciation Funny Ha Ha

When you see films like Mutual Appreciation and Funny Ha Ha then I see some unique film making. Although still struggling to decide if this is the beginning of a new genre or just ultra low budget student filmmaking.
I wonder if the Director Andrew Bujalski was reading up on his film history before he made these two films, or just decided to pick up a camera and film his friends....

Personally i believe that film history is important as if you don't know where you came from then how do you know where you are going? although i hate blatant copies / imitations. whats the point ?

Andy

 

[clive]

When you see films like Mutual Appreciation and Funny Ha Ha then I see some unique film making. Although still struggling to decide if this is the beginning of a new genre or just ultra low budget student filmmaking.
I wonder if the Director Andrew Bujalski was reading up on his film history before he made these two films, or just decided to pick up a camera and film his friends....

Personally i believe that film history is important as if you don't know where you came from then how do you know where you are going? although i hate blatant copies / imitations. whats the point ?

Andy

Andy... eventually I'll manage to get over to you that this kind of "fake referral" marketing ALWAYS goes badly and creates a negative reputation for the person involved.

This is twice now...

 

[reeln]

Cinema Hiistory Case Study

An interesting case of the Bette Davis classic "Dead Ringer" where a poor twin kills her rich twin and assumes her identity. This movie was shown on television about two weeks before a twin in California attempted to have her identical twin sister killed with the goal of assuming her life. A coincidence? When I heard the news story, I thought this person saw this movie (maybe for the first time) and maybe didn't realize the popularity of the the movie, the stars, etc. Perhaps, if she had been a little bit more into Cinema History, she may not be serving time in prison today. Cinema History has so many facets for study, including orginal stories that are being remade in some form or fashion.

 

[sonnyboo]

Russian film makers are some of the world's greatest cinematographers... and until the fall of the Soviet Union Prague was where all the best people trained.

Prague is not in Russia. That's actually central Europe. Vilmos Zsigmond and Lazlo Kovacs were from Hungary and are two of the 20th centuries most revered cinematographers. The influence of other cultures outside of the U.S. have affected movies forever.

John Woo's early 1980's works inspired Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez to even attempt their first movies and these were from bootleg VHS tapes from Hong Kong. Cinema History taught me these things.

Again, I want to hear from the other side of the fence. Just because I find cinema history essential for me, that doesn't mean it has to for other people.

Any of you young 'ens not believe that you need to know anything to be good at filmmaking? If so, why?

 

[bird]

Prague is not in Russia. That's actually central Europe. Vilmos Zsigmond and Lazlo Kovacs were from Hungary and are two of the 20th centuries most revered cinematographers. The influence of other cultures outside of the U.S. have affected movies forever.

John Woo's early 1980's works inspired Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez to even attempt their first movies and these were from bootleg VHS tapes from Hong Kong. Cinema History taught me these things.

Again, I want to hear from the other side of the fence. Just because I find cinema history essential for me, that doesn't mean it has to for other people.

Any of you young 'ens not believe that you need to know anything to be good at filmmaking? If so, why?

Seriously?

You bumped a two year old thread with the same topic as your other one (in fact, op is almost verbatim): http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=19732 just so you could call Clive out on an geographical guffaw? Perhaps Clive simply meant many great Russian filmmakers trained in Prague. Still doesn't negate the fact these Russians could have certain, if not specific, social/cultural sensibilities which audiences may identify as nostalgically *Russian*.

 

[Murdock]

Prague is not in Russia.

Maybe I can help. The original quote said some of the best cinematographers were from Russia and the happening place to be was Prague. Prague is in Czechoslovakia, which was part of the Soviet Union. Meaning Russian cinematographers would have had easy access Now it is known as the Czech Republic. Hope this helps.

 

[Dreadylocks]

Seriously?

You bumped a two year old thread with the same topic as your other one (in fact, op is almost verbatim): http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=19732 just so you could call Clive out on an geographical guffaw? Perhaps Clive simply meant many great Russian filmmakers trained in Prague. Still doesn't negate the fact these Russians could have certain, if not specific, social/cultural sensibilities which audiences may identify as nostalgically *Russian*.

I'm not actually taking a side here. But for some reason the way you called sonnyboo (the non-ginger-bread man, not the ginger-bread man) out cracked me up

edit: In sonny's defense, I read the thread you linked to and, until I read my posts, had no memory of commenting on such a thread. Just sayin.

 

[bird]

I'm not actually taking a side here. But for some reason the way you called sonnyboo (the non-ginger-bread man, not the ginger-bread man) out cracked me up

edit: In sonny's defense, I read the thread you linked to and, until I read my posts, had no memory of commenting on such a thread. Just sayin.

Yah, I was being uncharacteristically bitchy, er, I mean characteristically bitchy. You, and Murdock have good points. I just read this thread, once bumped, and it seemed tit for tat between the two. I just thought it was a shrill bump considering this is a duplicate topic and Clive's not even here to respond.

*rides off on her White Horse into the sunset*

 

[sonnyboo]

When I did a search for this topic, I had no idea it was a dupe as I can only see 1 of them in the search. I was more interested in see people's responses. Responding to the poor geography was more because I had not seen the reply years ago.

I apologize for the dupe, but this was the only one to come up in my search. I'm far more interested in people's opinions on Cinema History as opposed to where on the map is the Czech Republic.

 

[Murdock]

When I did a search for this topic, I had no idea it was a dupe as I can only see 1 of them in the search. I was more interested in see people's responses. Responding to the poor geography was more because I had not seen the reply years ago.

I apologize for the dupe, but this was the only one to come up in my search. I'm far more interested in people's opinions on Cinema History as opposed to where on the map is the Czech Republic.

I love you.

 

[Cracker Funk]

Again, I want to hear from the other side of the fence. Just because I find cinema history essential for me, that doesn't mean it has to for other people.

Ask, and ye shall receive.

I just might be the perfect candidate to play the role of "other side of the fence". In a seperate thread, I've recently mentioned that I don't really watch DVD's, barely at all. I see movies in the theater. The upside to my movie-watching habits is that I see movies the way they are supposed to be seen. The obvious downside is that I don't really watch many old movies. For an active filmmaker, my viewing-history of the agreed-upon-must-see-classics is embarrasingly paltry.

I haven't seen "Godfather II", "Vertigo", "Raging Bull", "Cassablanca", you name it, I probably haven't seen it. That doesn't mean I'm not interested, or won't enjoy it.

A couple years back, I was about to make the big move (no pun intended) from finally taking my camera off my tripod to explore the space around the action. I researched dolly shots as much as I could. Needless to say, this led me to Orson Welles. I still haven't seen "Touch of Evil", other than the beginning, but by coincidence, "Citizen Kane" was playing at my local cineplex. I jumped at the opportunity to see one of the most revered movies of all time, as it should be seen -- on the big screen. I loved it.

Thing is, though, as much as I've enjoyed learning and viewing what classics I have, I don't see how it's necessary to make myself the best filmmaker I can be. The reason I feel this way is because I think I've learned all of it, by proxy. Everything of worth, in the classics, has been mimicked repeatedly, has it not?

I grew up on Spielberg. If I can ever recreate the magic of his 80's adventures, my life will be complete. Watching his movies over and over and over and over again is all the history I feel I need (well, him, plus all my other influences). But it's not like he invented everything himself. He made creative choices based on his own unique flair, combined with the techniques that he'd seen done before him. And the people who he learned from -- they also learned from watching someone else.

Regardless of whether I seek it out or not, I think the influence of cinematic history is within me, simply by virtue of one thing being passed from one generation to the next, and to the next, and to the next. So, no, I don't believe it's important for me to learn cinema history. But I do enjoy it.

 

[Utopia]

Cinema history is important indeed.

I was recording ADR for a film the other day where one of the actors who is also an exec-producer on the project was telling the Supervising Sound Editor that "This scene needs to have ________". I went blank because I had never heard that term before and I'm sure it's from some popular movie from the 50s...