Pages

Sunday, January 13, 2013

Writing About Film

The article "Writing about Film" details five different kinds of film writing. The first is formal analysis. This requires the writer to separately consider each and every element of the film and its impact on the piece as a whole. Therefore, the viewer must develop a deeper understanding of each aspect.

Another type of film writing is film history. Such writing involves a knowledge of the culture of the film's time and place, particularly the norms and standards reflected in it. Furthermore, film history also entails the history of the film itself - the trials and tribulations as well as the successes and achievements experienced during its production, its release, and the aftermath: its legacy.


A third form of film writing is an ideological paper. These discuss the beliefs and ideals expressed in all films, ranging from political propaganda to nationalistic pride to simply being a good person.

Papers regarding cultural studies and national cinemas reflect on the deep, unintentional resonance that culture has on a film. A specific culture's values are invariably displayed in its films, leading to differences in perception amongst audiences of different cultures.


Finally, we come to discussions of the auteur. An auteur in film is a director whose personal creative vision is notable through all aspects of the film. Discussion of such recognizes this; ergo, criticism leads one to comprehend what really makes an auteur's film his or her film. This type typically takes traits of other papers, such as film history or formal analysis, in order to spread its focus to the film itself as well as the auteur's personal efforts.

To annotate a shot sequence is to take notes on each and every shot in the sequence. This is medium-specific; that is, it's unique to film and differs greatly from literary annotation. A key tip for this is to not only note the sequence's shots, but why they exist. What are the filmmakers trying to achieve utilizing these particular shots and edits? What do they wish to convey to the audience?


When we are told to think beyond the frame, the author is urging us to consider not only what we are seeing, but to equally consider what we don't see. We should consider the director and his previous works, the production history of the film that affects the choices of the filmmaker, the criticisms that others have of the film, the conventions of the genre in which the film is classified, and the influence of the culture to which the film was being released. All of these, in conjunction, can broaden one's understanding of the film and thus enable a more thoroughly analytical paper.

Sunday, December 2, 2012

Thursday, November 29, 2012

Docu-meta-ry

The purpose of this documentary is to document a documentary film crew's documenting of... something... for a documentary. I have yet to settle on what that "something" is because it is not the focus of the piece. Rather, the focus of the piece is the documentary film crew; through this, another purpose is gleaned: to reveal to the audience the trials and tribulations, the failures and successes, the ease and difficulty of the filmmaking process.

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

The Three Styles of Editing

REALISM - Raise the Red Lantern (1991)
Editing in the realist fashion is, in a sense, the lack thereof; that is, true to its name, realism is realistic. Little to no editing occurs, and cuts typically exist only to bridge scenes. Above is a prime example of realist editing from Zhang Yimou's Raise the Red Lantern; the selection is a sequence shot, meaning it is a single take, static in regards to not only motion but as well focus, lighting, and speed. The duration of Songlian's monologue and the duration of the shot are equal -- there is no editing done at all (or, at least in regards to cutting).

Step Outline

Click to get to my step outline! I love all of you :'D