Difference between a Metteurs-en-Scene and an Auteur - Essay Example

Section Short answers (All questions answered What is the difference between a Metteurs-en-scene and an auteur? Metteurs-en-scene and an auteur are literary or cinema works from varied sources whereby the work of auteur portrays a semantic dimension given that it is not purely formal. The works of Metteurs-en-scene on the other hand does not go past the realm of performance of transposing into the special complex cinematic codes in channeling a preexisting text or scenarios, a book or a play. The meaning of films from the auteur perspective are constructed in a posteriori manner which is semantic rather than stylistic or expressive, on the contrary the films of Metteurs-en-scene present the exact opposite of the auteur since they exist as a prior. Distinction on this basis has been a cause of the difficulty faced on whether to classify managers as either auteur or Metteurs-en-scene since it is not a clear-cut distinction (Wollen 1972). 2. What is the difference between art cinema and classical cinema? The distinction between art cinema and classical cinema is quite clear. While art cinema is the most famous under film studies through the recognition it gets out of famous film makers, specific films or specific kinds of cinemas not forgetting some writers and the audience it targets. They are common with the auteur kinds of films with a sample of its film being the films include LAvventura (1960). David Bordwell and other filmmakers on the other hand coin the term classical film. They largely stress on the Metteurs-en-scene kind of arts or film, classical cinema is widely spread due to the dominance of these kinds of films and the choice that has been made by most filmmakers to follow in the making of such films. The art cinemas are presented in small film theatres as compared to the classical, which are conducted on large picture palaces. Art cinemas screen new films with repertory functions drawing their audiences form highly educated urban intelligentsia as opposed to the classical cinema, which is rich in culture and attracts the rural uneducated folks (Kolker 1980). 3. Who are the movie brats and what do they have to do with Auteurism? Movie brats such as Michelangelo Antonioni (b. 1912), Federico Fellini (1920–1993), Jean-Luc Godard (b. 1930), and Ingmar Bergman (b. 1918); the films include LAvventura (1960), 8½ (1963), À bout de souffle (Breathless, 1960) and Det Sjunde inseglet (The Seventh Seal, 1957) play a critical role when it comes to the impact that auterism has in relation to film production. According to the lectures, it is evident that a new generation of movie brats has the controls of the production of their films (Grist 2000). The recent works of the brats have challenged the romantic and individualistic ideologies portrayed in the earlier works to conform to the aspects of auterism. As pointed out by David Cook, “Auteurism… became a marketing tool that coincided nicely with the rise of college level film education among the industry’s most heavily courted audience portion. In addition, Timothy Corrigan also reiterates the fact that the appearance of the American studio system making the deployment of auterism a potential outcome for of marking movies other than the system where the studio signatures were used. The brats also tend to focus on the role of Auteurism in enhancing the economies of distribution. The article therefore focuses on the place of Auteurism and its struggle over the organization of film production in the early years. The movie brats have therefore deployed Auteurism as an assertion of the professional managerial class prerogative against not only the studios but also the film unions. As depicted in the two films Joe and five easy pieces, the battles affected the balance of power that existed in the industry together with the representation of the identities concerning class in majority of the films (Grist 2000). 4. What is entailed by the aesthetic category of “the grotesque”? As reported by Stanley Kubrick, the aesthetics of Grotesque will entail the analysis of films concerning things such as the tones, moods and complex emotional affect. All of these aspects are perceived and discussed with outdated adjectives. The films by director Kubrick are often said to have cool emotional tone as expressed by his personality with reference to his public image. The aesthetic category, “grotesque” therefore is an ideology that entails the discussion that surround literary works with regards to the stylistic devices used in such plays such as the mood and the interaction that individuals have against the others in the given piece of work. Kubrick’s films have critical references from other actors on his mood some in brand such as “arctic spirit” which portrays the actor as a person of the people through the assurance of his friend coming for his rescue. In addition, his love for nature through deep affection for stray animals and household pets. Aesthetic grotesque is therefore an important element of any form of literary work (Naremore 2006). 5. What are the characteristics of the “Hawksian woman”? A Hawksian woman is that woman who is risk averse and this is portrayed when the woman asks one of the elites in a film why they are risking their lives. They respond without an exact reason but by claiming to be enjoying life through craziness and according to one of the films, the Hawk’s men have no place in the world since they are unreasonable as opposed to their women who are quite reasonable and act on points of decision making. In addition, Hawksian women have suffered at one time or the other therefore their attitude is that of once bitten twice shy, they live in fear of the male dominance witnessed in the society where they are viewed as the inferior with the men being superior and suspicious of their women at all times. Hawksian woman is therefore the traditional women whose place in the society is behind the scenes, the kitchen but later the women become enlightened about their rightful place, and the start being proud of them and appreciating the life, they had been denied (Louis 1981) Section 2: Essay Question 1. Relevance of David Bordwell’s notions of art cinema to the concept of the auteur In 1979, David Bordwell outlined the academic definition of art film as the art of cinema of film practice, which contrasts art film against the mainstreams of the classical cinemas in the acting arena. The mainstream films through the narrators depend on directors to organize a film in series in the casually related events to take place in the relevant time and space with every scene driving towards the same goal. The plot for the mainstream films is driven the well-defined protagonists, which is well framed with clear characters through well-defined question and answer logic. Other aspects concerning Auteurism are the problem solving nature of the characters and the deadline plot structures. The film is thereafter tied with fast pacing music structures and sound trucks to cue the appropriate emotion structures and tight seamless editing. Mainstream films, which follow the Auteurism format, have a small palette of familiar generic images of plots, verbal expressions, moral dilemmas or stock characters (McFarlane 2005). In contrast Bordwell states that,”…the art cinema motivates its narrative by two principles, which is realism and authority expressivity. The art films through Auteurism deviates from the mainstream classical filmmaking notions in that they typically will deal with episodic narrative structures hence loosening the chain of cause and effect. Concerning the topic above us will consider directors Timothy Corrigan and Alexander Kluge and their regard to Auteurism. It is fact that Kluge is a grudging auteur with a reluctant personality through which he seems to engage any historical issues more than the history itself. It has always been a factor of repetition repeatedly to locate the positions of the two directors concerning Auteurism given that they have evolved through the global film industry (Mamber 1996). This gives the two directors a platform that increasingly complicates their position in case they made a decision to shift into the postmodern culture. Assessments indicate that the two directors have in the past conducted a mobilization to enhance Auteurism as a critical category in the film industry making Auteurism to be regarded as a production strategy as opposed to a critical exploitation. in fact the marked shift within Auteurism is viewed as a way of receiving movies as opposed to away of production of the same making the a change in the central theme of Auteurism from the 1960’s all through to the 1960’s (McFarlane 2005). It is along these lines Corrigan and Kluge began to make specific use of commerce to their own singularity and subjectivity. Alongside the same, relevant terms have been revised stance such as fragmentation, diversification and multiplication of literary works as they are not new concerning the studies. As a heuristic category, theories and practices of Auteurism have never really been troubled as it was spread in France in the fifties through America and elsewhere in the sixties and seventies have tightly bound in the changes in coproduction and distribution strategies such as the rise in the international art cinema (Truffaut 1954). While these changes are frequently presented in production techniques making Auteurism as a more accurate way to cut through the complications of mass entertainment hence locating the expressive core of the film art (Lev 1988). They are also offered less visibility a more historically appropriate method of negotiating the reception of films. The historical adaptation of Auteurism goes back to the works of filmmakers like von and Einstein as stated by the two directors. The period runs through to the present through actors like Spielberg and Camino by identifying the desire and demand presented by the industry to generate art works specifically in the fields of romance (Mamber 1996). During this period, the industry separated itself from others to alienate itself with the mass media. It is therefore prudent that Auteurism does not offer limited aspects but vastly through new audiences that are retrieved from the modernism arts communities through new cultural sanctions to old audiences alienated and awash in a way that cannot be distinguished from the media images. On the contrary, the technique has been overstated through cultural presentations where Auteurism became a deft move in establishing a model that is likely to dominate and stabilize a critical reception over quite some long period (Lev 1988). The subsequent Auteurism marketing of movies from the literary works, such as Bemardo Bertoluccis1 900, David Leans Ryans Daughter, or Michael Camino’s Heavens Gate guaranteed, through the reverberations of directorial names across tides, a relationship between audience and movie. This is whereby an intentional and authorial agency governs, as a kind of brand-name vision whose contextual meanings are already determined; the way a movie is seen and received in the vivid aspects of Auteurism (Grist 2000). Depending on whether an individual translates the presence of Auteurism as the origin of stylistic device or textual consistencies and other variations of figurative authority supplementing a loss of the sources as Corrigan would say in the form of enunciation. The place of the auteur within a textual causality describes a way of organizing spectatorial position in a transcendent viewpoint (McFarlane 2005). Therefore, to view a film as an auteur means to read to respond to it as an expressive organization to precede or supersede any historical fragmentations and subjective distortions that can take over even the most classically coded film as argued out by David Bordwell through Auteurism (Grist 2000). According to David,”… the overt self-consciousness of the narration is often paralleled by an extra textual emphasis on the filmmaker as source. Within the art cinemas mode of production and reception, the concept of the author has a formal function it did not possess in the Holly-wood studio system. Film journalism and criticism promote authors, as do film festivals, retrospectives, and academic film study. Directors statements of intent guide comprehension of the film, while a body of work linked by an authorial signature encourages viewers to read each film as a chapter of an oeuvre…” (Truffaut 1954). References Grist, L, 2000, An Italo-Judeo Production: Taxi Driver. in The Films of Martin Scorsese, 1963-77: Authorship and Context, 1(1), 123-214. Kolker, RP, 1980, The Tectonics of the Mechanical Man’. in a Cinema of Loneliness: Penn, Kubrick, Coppola, Altman, 1(1), 69-138. Lev, P, 1988, The Big Sleep: Production history and authorship. Canadian Review of American Studies, 1(19), 1-21. Louis, G, 1981, The cult of personality: the cinema of Howard Hawks in Masters of American Cinema. Prentice-Hall: New Jersey. Mamber, S, 1996, A Clockwork Orange. in Falsetto, Mario (ed.) Perspective on Stanley Kubrick, G.K. Hall & Co, 1(1), 171-184. McFarlane, B, 2005, Smoking guns and Smouldering lips:"The Big Sleep". in the Screen Education, 1(39), 139-143. Naremore, J, 2006, Stanley Kubrick and the aesthetics of the grotesque. in Film Quarterly, 60(1), 4-14. Truffaut, F, 1954, A Certain Tendency of the French Cinema. Oxford: Malden. Wollen, P, 1972, The Auteur Theory. Secker and Warburg: London. Read More