Film vs. Book (Topic of interest!!)
in Movies ·
Gerald Barrett25 said:topic about nice !! I guess I’ve been wondering lately... what is it actually that makes a movie qualify as an "art film"? It’s such a vague term, isn't it? Maybe it's just a label people throw around when they want to feel sophisticated, or maybe there's something deeper to it. I don't know. It feels like the line between a regular drama and something truly "artistic" is always shifting. I wonder if it's about the visual style, or if it's more about how the story refuses to follow a standard Hollywood structure. Some movies just feel like they're asking you to sit there and contemplate something for hours, whereas others just entertain you. It's a bit of a gray area, I suppose. I've got two posts about Greenaway if you're interested, I guess. 😉
Na about this topic !! I think I actually have a reference and a link to that one famous essay by Greenaway that my whole rant—sorry, my paraphrasing—is based on. Personally, I find that essay to be such a brilliant take on film as an actual art form. The core idea suggests that movies can be something much deeper than just illustrated text. It’s a pretty interesting concept to me, though it doesn't exactly mean I'm some massive Greenaway fanatic... maybe it's just a matter of broadening my horizons, I guess.
I’d really recommend it. I was just wandering around online and stumbled upon this site for Peter Greenaway... http://petergreenaway.co.uk/. It’s kind of interesting, I guess. He has such a specific way of doing things, you know? Maybe it's just me, but his style always feels so deliberate. I was thinking about some of his older stuff, like The Draughtsman's Contract, and how much thought goes into every single frame. It's not really like most movies you see nowadays. Anyway, just thought I'd share the link. Might be worth a look if you're into that sort of thing. I mean, you should really just go read his Quotes... like, for example, my favorite one. Cinema is not a playground for Sharon Stone. 😁
Regarding Greenaway... I guess I've been sitting here reading through those links you sent over...
Just a few questions... what's the deal with animated films??... especially those older ones from before the 60s, when almost everything was basically built from storyboards?? In those cases, there isn't really a literal foundation in the form of a formal script. So, I guess, are we going to call everything that starts out on paper an "extension of literature"? If that's the case, does that mean painting is just a continuation of literature because a painting starts as a sketch on paper? Maybe I'm overthinking it, but I don't know. 😬
If movies actually followed what Greenway is pushing for, I guess we wouldn't be calling cinema some kind of "derivative branch of literature" anymore. It would probably feel more like a "derivative branch of painting," maybe just with some music playing in the background or something. Just a thought, I suppose. 😁
Besides that, there's this other thing similar to what Greenaway advocates for—kind of like the computer demo scene back in the 80s and 90s. And honestly, I really wouldn't want to see something like that ever replacing the way film rules work today. Maybe it's just me, but I guess I'd rather keep things the way they are. 😉