tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11122973.post112304758907770313..comments2024-02-08T05:04:18.484-08:00Comments on J'S THEATER: The Auteur Theory (Brief Musings)John Khttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08073378940347627766noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11122973.post-1123593050443584982005-08-09T06:10:00.000-07:002005-08-09T06:10:00.000-07:00Yes! I was going to mention Hal Hartley too. Those...Yes! I was going to mention Hal Hartley too. Those early films were amazing! His recent stuff... don't know... it doesn't get released over here in England.Stefan Toblerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08364524935935510187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11122973.post-1123515640775487322005-08-08T08:40:00.000-07:002005-08-08T08:40:00.000-07:00Ryan, I meant to add Jarmusch and Sayles, and I de...Ryan, I meant to add Jarmusch and Sayles, and I definitely agree that they and the others you mention have definable styles, or in the case of Sayles, an ideological compass that is usually evident. I'd add Mike Leigh, Terence Malik, etc.<BR/><BR/>Reggie, your comments about the collaborative aspects of filmmaking are right on, and call into question a central element of auteurship. I wasn't thinking of the publication of the Agee book, but thanks for bringing that up. And I guess you could say "cinema" or "film" or "movies"--all three work for me.John Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08073378940347627766noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11122973.post-1123122866405064512005-08-03T19:34:00.000-07:002005-08-03T19:34:00.000-07:00John:Is this post in honor of the publication of J...John:<BR/><BR/>Is this post in honor of the publication of James Agee's film criticism -- in one volume, the novel A Death in the Family and Now Let Us Praise Famous Men in another -- in the Library of America series?:)<BR/><BR/>I was quite taken with the auteur theory when I was younger (and reading Sarris and the rest of the Village Voice from cover to cover), and I'm sure there's a copy of Andrew S' The American Cinema around my place somewhere. One of the problematic things about it is how collaborative filmmaking is: not just the director but the cinematographer who handles lighting (and sometimes camera placement) and the whole range of others (including the screenwriter) who are involved in making a movie (where would Welles have been when making Citizen Kane, for example, without John Ford's favorite cinematographer Greg Toland?) The French critics (later turned directors) also tended to praise a number of directors who were in the main not then considered of first rank, and disliked what can be considered 'A-list' or high prestige pictures for more genre-fueled fare (hence their 'discovery' and touting of Film Noir). Like all theories that attempt to 'explain everything' it doesn't entirely hold together....<BR/><BR/>...and yet. Directors DO have distinctive styles/takes on the world, and the more control they have over their films the more obvious it is. Sometimes its in terms of visual style, sometimes its at the level of theme (after reading something about Billy Wilder, I've noticed how nearly all his films have to do at some level with artifice or impersonation/false identities). There is something to "auteurism" and it is an interesting lens through which to view movies (or should that be 'film'?:)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11122973.post-1123082308377027702005-08-03T08:18:00.000-07:002005-08-03T08:18:00.000-07:00hey john:great post...I've been looking forward to...hey john:<BR/><BR/>great post...I've been looking forward to Wong Kar-Wai's 2046 for sometime now...<BR/><BR/>and, im planning to see it when im in town for more interviews august 15th thru 19th.<BR/><BR/>in terms of american auteur filmmakers, i would add Hal Hartley, Jim Jarmusch, and even John Sayles to the list. Each has films that resemble that kind of "auteur spirit" of sorts.Ryan Cantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12957911952441418201noreply@blogger.com