History UsefulNotes / TheAuteurTheory

30th Apr '17 11:26:28 PM JulianLapostat
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The original auteurists likewise also took it for granted, on the part of their readers, and in their writings, that a film-maker who they classified as "auteur" [[RequiredSecondaryPowers are fundamentally competent technicians, good storytellers]] and that their films are genuinely very good. It's true that they championed film-makers like Hawks or Hitchcock who were seen as entertainers (in their time) but which they argued were great artists, but this has often led later writers to make claims that the likes of Creator/EdWood can be seen as an auteur, and especially in TheOughties to put forth ideas of [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgar_auteurism vulgar auteurism]] by which any mass market product can be potentially seen as auteurist since some of them are made and codified by film-makers with a distinct visual and editing style. Film historians note that the original Cahiers writers were in an entirely different film-making era, a time when genre fiction like science-fiction and pulp narratives were low-budget BMovie as opposed to UsefulNotes/TheBlockbusterAgeOfHollywood where such genre fiction while no longer prestigious receive astronomically high movie budgets and high production values. When films like TheWestern or the suspense thriller, FilmNoir and others were more or less ordinary fare, as opposed to the late 20th-early 21st, when such genres are usually rare (as the Western is) or now seen as prestigious (thrillers and NeoNoir like ''Film/GoneGirl'' and ''Film/{{Zodiac}}''). This is not to say of course that the idea of a mass-market auteur is no longer possible, in theory it is, but it's being defined in an entirely different context from the one in TheFifties, and a different period of mass entertainment, and as such claims of direct continuity are at best EntertaininglyWrong, at worst, WishFulfillment.

to:

* The original auteurists likewise also took it for granted, on the part of their readers, and in their writings, that a film-maker who they classified as "auteur" [[RequiredSecondaryPowers are fundamentally competent technicians, good storytellers]] and that their films are genuinely very good. It's true that they championed film-makers like Hawks or Hitchcock who were seen as entertainers (in their time) but which they argued were great artists, but this has often led later writers to make claims that the likes of Creator/EdWood can be seen as an auteur, and especially in TheOughties to put forth ideas of [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgar_auteurism vulgar auteurism]] by which any mass market product can be potentially seen as auteurist since some of them are made and codified by film-makers with a distinct visual and editing style. Film historians note that the original Cahiers writers were in an entirely different film-making era, a time when genre fiction like science-fiction and pulp narratives were low-budget BMovie as opposed BMovie, with little known, obscure B-Grade actors which really did require film-makers to use style and creativity to improvise and riff off of weak stories and technical limitations. This is different from UsefulNotes/TheBlockbusterAgeOfHollywood where such genre fiction while no longer prestigious receive astronomically high movie budgets budgets, top of the line visual effects and high production values. values, and A-List stars. When films like TheWestern or the suspense thriller, FilmNoir and others were more or less ordinary fare, as opposed to the late 20th-early 21st, when such genres are usually rare evoked as NostalgiaFilter GenreThrowback (as the Western is) or now seen as prestigious (thrillers and NeoNoir Neo-Noir like ''Film/GoneGirl'' and ''Film/{{Zodiac}}''). This is not to say of course that the idea of a mass-market auteur is no longer possible, in theory it is, but it's being defined in an entirely different context from the one in TheFifties, and a different period of mass entertainment, and as such claims of direct continuity are at best EntertaininglyWrong, at worst, WishFulfillment.CriticalResearchFailure.
30th Apr '17 8:50:13 PM JulianLapostat
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

* The original auteurists likewise also took it for granted, on the part of their readers, and in their writings, that a film-maker who they classified as "auteur" [[RequiredSecondaryPowers are fundamentally competent technicians, good storytellers]] and that their films are genuinely very good. It's true that they championed film-makers like Hawks or Hitchcock who were seen as entertainers (in their time) but which they argued were great artists, but this has often led later writers to make claims that the likes of Creator/EdWood can be seen as an auteur, and especially in TheOughties to put forth ideas of [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulgar_auteurism vulgar auteurism]] by which any mass market product can be potentially seen as auteurist since some of them are made and codified by film-makers with a distinct visual and editing style. Film historians note that the original Cahiers writers were in an entirely different film-making era, a time when genre fiction like science-fiction and pulp narratives were low-budget BMovie as opposed to UsefulNotes/TheBlockbusterAgeOfHollywood where such genre fiction while no longer prestigious receive astronomically high movie budgets and high production values. When films like TheWestern or the suspense thriller, FilmNoir and others were more or less ordinary fare, as opposed to the late 20th-early 21st, when such genres are usually rare (as the Western is) or now seen as prestigious (thrillers and NeoNoir like ''Film/GoneGirl'' and ''Film/{{Zodiac}}''). This is not to say of course that the idea of a mass-market auteur is no longer possible, in theory it is, but it's being defined in an entirely different context from the one in TheFifties, and a different period of mass entertainment, and as such claims of direct continuity are at best EntertaininglyWrong, at worst, WishFulfillment.
18th Mar '17 5:46:24 PM JulianLapostat
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

* The most debated and often misunderstood aspect of auteurism is "style". The likes of Creator/BobChipman, Creator/WilliamGoldman and others believe that the main focus determining an auteur is an obvious visual style and aesthetic that clearly makes a film the vision of a single artist. However, the French and Sarris identified as auteurs directors like Creator/GeorgeCukor and Creator/ErnstLubitsch who are usually not seen as great stylists in the way that Creator/AlfredHitchcock is. Likewise, the likes of Creator/JeanLucGodard and even Sarris deprecated (initially) the likes of Creator/StanleyKubrick precisely because they felt he was "style" over substance[[note]]Godard also accused Kubrick of being "[[PretenderDiss a good pupil]]" who merely borrowed his tricks from Creator/MaxOphuls[[/note]]. The original auteurists had no hard and fast notion about "style" and indeed were criticized in their time, and afterwards, for using the word "style" to play favorites while MovingTheGoalposts to attack/defend those they liked/disliked. Auteurists on the other hand insist that not every film-maker has a style that manifests in the same way, and while some directors have obvious visual styles and aesthetics, others are more subtle, quiet and work out their style via direction of actors or use of tone.
9th Jul '16 1:21:40 AM KingClark
Is there an issue? Send a Message


-> ''"People are incorrect to compare a director to an author. If he's a creator, he's more like an architect. And an architect conceives his plans according to precise circumstances.''

to:

-> ''"People are incorrect to compare a director to an author. If he's a creator, he's more like an architect. And an architect conceives his plans according to precise circumstances.''"''
1st Jul '16 1:35:35 PM Anddrix
Is there an issue? Send a Message


The concept of the "auteur" had a great deal of vogue in the '60s and '70s, where it was used in magazines and the media as a catch-all shorthand of a "serious film-maker" or "great director". In America it was then, and remains in the Internet Age, a real BaseBreaker among movie geeks, because for some, it overestimates the importance of the film's director over his other collaborators, assigning him credit for a film over the writers who, in the majority of instances, come up with the story and characters, the actors who play the roles, the producers who fund the films, and the army of collaborators who play a role in shaping the product. There is, needless to say, much confusion about what "auteurism", or the "auteur theory", means and how its definitions shifted.

to:

The concept of the "auteur" had a great deal of vogue in the '60s and '70s, where it was used in magazines and the media as a catch-all shorthand of a "serious film-maker" or "great director". In America it was then, and remains in the Internet Age, a real BaseBreaker controversial subject among movie geeks, because for some, it overestimates the importance of the film's director over his other collaborators, assigning him credit for a film over the writers who, in the majority of instances, come up with the story and characters, the actors who play the roles, the producers who fund the films, and the army of collaborators who play a role in shaping the product. There is, needless to say, much confusion about what "auteurism", or the "auteur theory", means and how its definitions shifted.
25th Dec '15 4:28:24 PM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


This idea didn't spread into the mainstream until the film school students at the time (who knew these concepts), like Creator/MartinScorsese, Creator/FrancisFordCoppola, Creator/StevenSpielberg, and others like Creator/WoodyAllen, became directors in their own right. The culmination of this was the NewHollywood era, also known as "the age of the director", where film directors received ProtectionFromEditors and had celebrity status comparable to the movie stars in front of the camera. On one hand, this produced a creative explosion in American cinema in TheSeventies, with many films frequently cited on "greatest of all time" lists having been made in the '70s by auteur filmmakers. On the other hand, a backlash eventually emerged against the idea, with some believing it enables the PrimaDonnaDirector mindset; expensive flops like ''Film/HeavensGate'' and ''One from the Heart'' were often cited as showing what happened when this idea went too far. But the concept endures as an ideal for independent filmmakers in America and around the world, and the core idea of film as an art form capable of individual expression despite its collective discipline has endured. In that respect, the idea was a success.

to:

This idea didn't spread into the mainstream until the film school students at the time (who knew these concepts), like Creator/MartinScorsese, Creator/FrancisFordCoppola, Creator/StevenSpielberg, and others like Creator/WoodyAllen, became directors in their own right. The culmination of this was the NewHollywood UsefulNotes/NewHollywood era, also known as "the age of the director", where film directors received ProtectionFromEditors and had celebrity status comparable to the movie stars in front of the camera. On one hand, this produced a creative explosion in American cinema in TheSeventies, with many films frequently cited on "greatest of all time" lists having been made in the '70s by auteur filmmakers. On the other hand, a backlash eventually emerged against the idea, with some believing it enables the PrimaDonnaDirector mindset; expensive flops like ''Film/HeavensGate'' and ''One from the Heart'' were often cited as showing what happened when this idea went too far. But the concept endures as an ideal for independent filmmakers in America and around the world, and the core idea of film as an art form capable of individual expression despite its collective discipline has endured. In that respect, the idea was a success.
6th Nov '15 9:17:03 PM kenaykash
Is there an issue? Send a Message


To begin with, there's the word, "auteur", French for "author". The beginning of the movement is an innocuous enough article in the famous French cultural journal ''Cahiers du Cinema'' titled ''Une certaine tendance du cinéma français'', which translates as "A Certain Tendancy of French Cinema". The article was written by none other than Creator/FrancoisTruffaut, and as its name suggests, its original context was specific to French cinema in the '50s. At the time, the general claim against cinema being TrueArt was that it was "art by committee" and lacked the individual expression of writers, poets, painters, musicians, and architects to their mediums. The movies that had cultural cache then were the French version of OscarBait -- films with prestigious literary pedigree, which the ''Cahiers'' critics noted were often flat as cinema, with little creativity in camera and editing technique compared to, say, a film by Creator/AlfredHitchcock which abounded with invention.

to:

To begin with, there's the word, "auteur", French for "author". The beginning of the movement is an innocuous enough article in the famous French cultural journal ''Cahiers du Cinema'' titled ''Une certaine tendance du cinéma français'', which translates as "A Certain Tendancy of French Cinema". The article was written by none other than Creator/FrancoisTruffaut, and as its name suggests, its original context was specific to French cinema in the '50s. At the time, the general claim against cinema being TrueArt was that it was "art by committee" and lacked the individual expression of writers, poets, painters, musicians, and architects to their mediums. The movies that had cultural cache cachet then were the French version of OscarBait -- films with prestigious literary pedigree, which the ''Cahiers'' critics noted were often flat as cinema, with little creativity in camera and editing technique compared to, say, a film by Creator/AlfredHitchcock which abounded with invention.
26th Aug '15 4:37:53 PM TARINunit9
Is there an issue? Send a Message


To begin with, there's the word. The beginning of the movement is an innocuous enough article in the famous French cultural journal ''Cahiers du Cinema'' titled ''Une certaine tendance du cinéma français'', which translates as "A Certain Tendancy of French Cinema". The article was written by none other than Creator/FrancoisTruffaut, and as its name suggests, its original context was specific to French cinema in the '50s. At the time, the general claim against cinema being TrueArt was that it was "art by committee" and lacked the individual expression of writers, poets, painters, musicians, and architects to their mediums. The movies that had cultural cache then were the French version of OscarBait -- films with prestigious literary pedigree, which the ''Cahiers'' critics noted were often flat as cinema, with little creativity in camera and editing technique compared to, say, a film by Creator/AlfredHitchcock which abounded with invention.

to:

To begin with, there's the word.word, "auteur", French for "author". The beginning of the movement is an innocuous enough article in the famous French cultural journal ''Cahiers du Cinema'' titled ''Une certaine tendance du cinéma français'', which translates as "A Certain Tendancy of French Cinema". The article was written by none other than Creator/FrancoisTruffaut, and as its name suggests, its original context was specific to French cinema in the '50s. At the time, the general claim against cinema being TrueArt was that it was "art by committee" and lacked the individual expression of writers, poets, painters, musicians, and architects to their mediums. The movies that had cultural cache then were the French version of OscarBait -- films with prestigious literary pedigree, which the ''Cahiers'' critics noted were often flat as cinema, with little creativity in camera and editing technique compared to, say, a film by Creator/AlfredHitchcock which abounded with invention.
21st Sep '14 7:12:21 PM Prfnoff
Is there an issue? Send a Message


For the French, their argument was important in getting cinema itself OutOfTheGhetto of not being TrueArt, and in making a case for "genre" directors in [[TheMusical musicals]], [[TheWestern Westerns]], {{film noir}}, and {{screwball comedy}} to be taken as seriously as arthouse directors as Creator/IngmarBergman, Creator/FedericoFellini, and Creator/JeanRenoir. To their SophisticatedAsHell tastes, there was no difference between liking a commercial film like ''Film/RearWindow'' and a serious film by Creator/SergeiEisenstein because, for them, both directors were just as rich in invention and technique. In their view, "genre" filmmakers were underrated because critics dismissed the content or the plot itself out of hand without looking at the {{subtext}}, the {{Meaningful Background Event}}s, and other {{Genius Bonus}}es these films were filled with, whereas someone like Eisenstein declared his artistic ambitions openly in his movies and so allowed people to admire him for [[RightForTheWrongReasons the wrong reasons]].

to:

For the French, their argument was important in getting cinema itself OutOfTheGhetto of not being TrueArt, and in making a case for "genre" directors in [[TheMusical musicals]], [[TheWestern Westerns]], {{film noir}}, noir}} (a term coined by French critic Nino Frank in 1946), and {{screwball comedy}} to be taken as seriously as arthouse directors as Creator/IngmarBergman, Creator/FedericoFellini, and Creator/JeanRenoir. To their SophisticatedAsHell tastes, there was no difference between liking a commercial film like ''Film/RearWindow'' and a serious film by Creator/SergeiEisenstein because, for them, both directors were just as rich in invention and technique. In their view, "genre" filmmakers were underrated because critics dismissed the content or the plot itself out of hand without looking at the {{subtext}}, the {{Meaningful Background Event}}s, and other {{Genius Bonus}}es these films were filled with, whereas someone like Eisenstein declared his artistic ambitions openly in his movies and so allowed people to admire him for [[RightForTheWrongReasons the wrong reasons]].
21st Sep '14 1:40:28 AM JulianLapostat
Is there an issue? Send a Message


-->-- '''Creator/John Ford'''

to:

-->-- '''Creator/John Ford'''
'''Creator/JohnFord'''
This list shows the last 10 events of 18. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=UsefulNotes.TheAuteurTheory