Writing About Film

The following response is about the article Writing About Film.

The five kinds of film are broken down to "formal analysis", "film history", "ideological papers", "cultural studies/ national cinemas", and "discussion of the auteur".

Formal analysis of a film is very narrowed down. It focuses on the aspects that make up a film rather than a general commentary on whether a film was good or bad. For instance, there are a lot of terms in film such as "folly" or "soft box" terms that describe every element that makes up a set. These details in production are what consist of a formal analysis. By looking beyond the plot of a story and how a cinematographer was able to achieve a shot or how the lighting was adjusted for cinematic quality, a student is able to understand the effort put forth in the production of a film. Formal analysis looks at a film in detail and it gets to the truth in the work put into making a film.

Film history is a category that explores the relationship between movies and the culture during that time period. They reflect the given history at the time and they can represent view points and opinion that the director has on the society when the film was made. All films have a history too; meaning why they were made and what problems arose during production. Finally, al films should be understood in the larger context of film history. One film could make history through the innovations made such as the movie "Avatar" or certain historical trends like any war movie.

The ideological paper reflect an individuals set of beliefs based of a film. They can represent a societies view point or it could propagandistic in order for the population to be convinced/ directed towards a certain way of thinking. Many war films have been made to demonize other countries in order for public opinion to be beneficial in eliminating threats from other countries. Even today movies like the "Hurt Locker" and in general documentaries about the modern war front antagonize the Taliban and disregards their beliefs in order to make them seem barbaric. It's important to understand that even films whose purpose is to entertain may be promoting and manipulating feelings about a certain set of values. I remember that I watched the movie "Pearl Harbor" and I despised the Japanese for a few days until I realized it was all behind us. It just shows how movies affect an individual.

Cultural studies and national cinemas talks about how films reflect the cultures and nations in which they are produced. According to the article, Hollywood films reflect certain things about our nation's culture: our love of distraction, our attraction to adrenaline and testosterone etc. All these overpowering aspects are indeed found in almost every film debued in America. Movies like "The Hangover" and "Hancock" or even "Iron Man". Films from different countries vary and its important for the student to realize how movies reflect the lives of a country.

When looking at film, the discussion of the auteur might be the biggest piece in understanding a movie. The auteur is the director and its the director that makes the magic happen (since he is telling everyone of his or her vision). This way of writing about film looks at the director and his previous works. As "The Cutting Edge" says, every movie is a remix of the original. Directors use the ideas from previous directors and a student can see connections between movies and understand how they are employed to make a scene more effective. Also to the auteur subject, being able to see originality in what the director employs (his own creativity not remixes of other creations) we can see how traits are carried over to other movies. A key example is Tarentino with his "Inglorious Basterds" being translated over into his new movie "Django Unchained". Quick camera work to identify individuals was very dominant in the films and they work as a signature to identify Tarentino. Still, auteur criticism is widely practiced and is useful in helping us to understand the common themes and aesthetic decisions in films by the same director.

Annotating film sequence in the most simplist of terms is describing the shot that is used one after another (i.e. medium shot then dolly shot then extreme close up). The purpose it serves is to identify a pattern used by the director of photography. This better helps you understand how the director crafter his film and why the film has a certain effect on the audience.

When a student "thinks beyond the frame" they will consider how the film was made and its historical context and so on. For instance, one can ask: 1) "who made the film?" By asking this, a student can learn a common theme and genre present that reflects the directors interest. 2) "What is the production history of the film?" By knowing the conditions the film was made under helps understanding of the aesthetic and cinematic choices that the director has made. 3) "What do critics and scholars say?" By reading what critics say about a film you are about to watch, the student can narrow his or her focus on the film in order to know when to make key observations that are crucial to the plot. 4) "What can you learn from the film's genre?" Genres have limitations that are represented by what the audience deems appropriate to watch (all subjective to the genre).