‘IN THE CONTEXT OF FILM PRODUCTION PROCESS, IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO TALK ABOUT THE DIRECTOR AS THE FILM’S AUTEUR’.
DISCUSS HOW VALID THIS VIEW IS IN RELATION TO EXAMPLES FROM PRIDE AND THE HUNGER GAMES.
The auteur theory, holds that the director, who oversees all audio and visual elements of the motion picture, is more to be considered the “author” of the movie than is the writer of the screenplay. And although there are always films being made, with directors behind them, an auteur is often very rare. Examples of modern auteurs include Ken Loach (Kes 1969, I, Daniel Blake 2016), Edgar Wright (Hot Fuzz 2007, Shaun of the Dead 2004, Scott Pilgrim vs. the World 2010, Baby Driver 2017), Wes Anderson (Isle of Dogs 2018, The Grand Budapest Hotel 2014, Moonrise Kingdom 2012, The Royal Tenenbaums 2001) and Tim Burton (Beetlejuice 1988, Edward Scissorhands 1990, Corpse Bride 2005, The Nightmare Before Christmas 1993). With these directors their films are made from their own imagination and have all creative license over their movies which they have usually written, produced and directed. Such fundamental visual elements as camera placement, blocking, lighting, and scene length, rather than plot line, convey the message of the film. Supporters of the auteur theory further contend that the most cinematically successful films will bear the unmistakable personal stamp of the director.
Truffaut said that these films treated the director as only a metteur en scene, a "stager" who simply adds the performers and pictures to an already completed script. Truffaut coined the phrase La politique des auteurs ("The policy of the authors") to describe his view, in which he expressed a clear preference for directors who operated with autonomy, vision and a signature style. These discussions were part of the beginning of the French New Wave in cinema. By understanding what a true auteur is and what they want too portray in their work, I chose to watch these two videos shown in the blog.
In relation to The Hunger Games, it is clear that Gary Ross has not made too much of a personal stamp on the film, this may be due to the fact that the books had been so successful, that the audience who plan to watch a close adaptation would be very disappointed with a film that does nor successfully achieve this. And although Ross also contributed writing the screenplay, it was an obvious decision to keep the narrative close to the original books.
Pride, a film that is based on real life events, is also an example of how the director must respect the story and the narrative, and not act as an auteur, as this would misrepresent and somewhat lessen the story. The plot and the story is specifically created to be as close to the original real life events as possible, and through the representation of both the miners and the gays and lesbians we as an audience can clearly visualise the era and the political movement at the time. Overall, in this film there is no independent style or unique writing and the focus is clearly only on representation and the narrative.
In conclusion, I would agree with the statement in that the director is not the auteur, as these are extremely rare, especially in modern cinema. Usually, an auteur creates a film being not just the director, but also the writer and the producer. An example of an auteur who successfully creates movies that have a clear independent style is the director Wes Anderson, as we study him and analyse ‘Moonrise Kingdom’.
Comments
Post a Comment