Although the most popular, the commercial film industry is not the only way to produce and project motion pictures to targeted audiences. Documentaries and avant-garde films have their own guidelines, production values, technological innovations, budgets, and overall viewership that differ greatly from that of fiction-based films. Many avant-garde films are made not only to challenge the existing use of film itself but also to express the personal views or experiences of the screenwriter and/or director. In most cases, fiction-based film focuses on telling the story of a character rather than shedding light on their life and challenging the presentation of the narrative. Commercial film and film documentary differ greatly not only in their …show more content…
Commercial film narratives can also drift from the reality of our world by creating fictional lands, races, and characters, while documentaries are solely based on our world, giving the audience a chance to either see or experience what the documentary covers in their daily lives. The ethical aspect of film documentary can make or break the perception the audience has of it, the filmmaker to either choose to focus on their own culture or expand their point of view towards another culture. Many documentaries exploring different cultures can be highly successful, but there is always a chance of the film failing if the filmmaker fails to show this other culture in a way to best represent and demonstrate the truth behind this culture for outsiders without being disrespectful. Avant-garde can also push the perception of the world through filmmaking as many of these films can be abstract in order to challenge the current mediums and their use in the
“A particular type of Non Narrative avant-garde films are the Absolute films, which are completely abstract films”, the films that is nonrepresentational, using form and design to produce its effect and often describable as visual music.
Documentaries also include films which are intended to ‘expose’ and often carry interviews, for example Michael Moore’s films on social concerns
Alex Ross Perry is a rising, prolific writer, director, and actor who has won acclaimed for his creativity from critics and other filmmakers. After graduating from NYU’s Tisch School of the Art, he has completed four feature films, Impolex (2009), The Color Wheel (2011), Listen Up Philip (2014), and Queen of Earth (2015). Not only is he a dedicated original filmmaker in which all of his films were shot on a tradition mean, 16-millimeter film, of production, but also he is an audacious artist that he opts for the avant-garde narrative without following rigid adherence to Hollywood-inspire rules or award-winning recipes. Since then he remains a personage of importance in the New York City film production community as well as plays an influential part in encouraging students who enter the film program at the Tisch School of the Art to be diligent.
Many films have captivated the hearts and minds of Americans, however a true film goes in-depth into the current social tensions and customs of the modern world. Such a film, was The Wizard Of Oz. Beneath the surface of the film, one may examine many characteristics of real world struggles through creative flair. In films, directors will strive to make characters, storylines, backdrops, lighting and other creative factors up to par with modern day events (Lewis 2007). So too, The Wizard Of Oz offers viewers something rather unique and made the world of Hollywood more esoteric than ever before.
Driven by the wish to rescue common people's stories from sweeping historical master-narratives and by the impulse to help different cultures understand one another on a profound, human level, I want to be a writer and documentary filmmaker, so that I can pay intimate attention to individuals while dealing with larger issues. Film, in particular, can immerse its audience in the world it recreates, allowing them to recognize themselves in others and thereby bridging the distance between the two.
Film, though, is more than just entertainment. It often (though not always) intends to entertain, but can also be intended to change opinions and ideas, and to inspire. In addition to carrying out its intended purpose, a film is something of a time capsule: telling us volumes about the people and culture that produced it, highlighting subtle and not-so-subtle differences between then and now.
In a light of growing appetite for entertainment, filmmakers face uneasy decisions. Decisions that challenge their ethical obligations to make professional documentaries for the social good, not for commercial/financial gain. The tendency to produce cheap and fast films makes it difficult to maintain the scope of professionalism. The title of “documentaries” obligated to be based on real subjects, themes, words, sounds, and images. The scenes cannot be staged, or cut out.
The beginning of the 20th century was a tumultuous time for all those involved in the process of American filmmaking. There was a massive disconnect between what filmmakers were creating, what exhibitors wanted to show, and what audiences wanted to see. This was exasperated by the introduction and transition from short serial films to the feature. Exhibitors imported assumptions that the public at large wished to see short, individual act films reminiscent of Vaudeville because they were primarily lower class and in the past enjoyed “low art.” In actuality, however, audiences of all socioeconomic backgrounds were wanting the more compelling stories explored in longer features.
The times are changing, and so is Hollywood, according to Edward Jay Epstein, author of the article “Why Hollywood’s Business Model Is Bad News for Creativity”. He believes that the big Hollywood studios that mass-produce movies nowadays have ruined the future for low-budget films that are more about creativity and good dialogue. In this article, Epstein appears to be reaching out to anyone who enjoys movies, and is informing the readers about the truth behind the movies we all know and love. The animated or comic-based movies that take over the big screen are making it almost impossible for the more original film makers to produce films that aren’t driven by a franchise and
Beginning in the late 1960’s, a new film movement known as New Hollywood began, rapidly replacing the Classical method of filmmaking. This era was unique because many popular films of the time were produced outside of the studio system, shot on-location, and with non-professional actors and actresses. These “art films” were brash, irreverent, and full of anger. While directors during this time used drastically different methods to achieve their final product, the meaning they attempted to convey through their art was often quite similar in its presentation and encompassment of society. According to David Bordwell, “stylistic devices and thematic motifs may differ from director to director, [but] the overall functions
The costs, methods of distribution, and themes of Hollywood and Nollywood films reflect strongly their target audiences; how the target audience affects the production of a film and how the production of a movie is designed to capture a specific
One model has grown to be extremely popular since its emergence in the 1970’s, the Blockbuster model. It has been argued that the Blockbuster model is more of a visual spectacle than the more narrative-focused films. Filmmakers, like Steven Spielberg, rely on massive amounts of money and general audiences to create these Blockbuster films. Blockbuster films are essentially considered more of an event across all forms of media, whereas a genre concentrates on the narrative and meaning within the story of the film itself. Genre’s can still carry an interesting narrative while also being visually striking or having massive international success. However, Blockbuster’s are more simplistic in that they constantly ironize or parody the tropes we typically see in other forms of film or theatre. Considering all of this, it can be argued that while films that fit the mold of the Blockbuster model may gain massive success and revenue, the effects are not nearly as lasting or significant as films that prioritize narrative over
When watching a film, two questions are usually asked by ourselves: what is this story about? What does the director want to express through the film? Different audiences will interpret the same story variously because of the exclusive experience or the cultural background, rendering them understand the metaphor in diverse aspects. For filmmakers, depending on their unique production methods or intentions, will tell the story in a different structure or style as well. Bill Nichols (2017: 61) declared that three elements are intertwined with each other in a film: the filmmaker, the audience and the film itself, which is also known as the triangle of communication. One function of the triangle is to work as a model for having a deeper understand of films. Therefore, in this essay, both Last Train Home (Fan, 2009) and Steam of Life (Berghall and Hotakainen, 2010) will be analysed and contrasted through the triangle of communication to discover the stories of the viewer, the films and the filmmakers behind the two films.
Furthermore, Constantine Verevis claims a fact that film genres do not only show the theme of the film, “they are located too in expectations and audience knowledge.” “These expectations and audience knowledges they entail are public in status,” Barry Keith Gant said. They have a great influence on the way they engage with plot and narrations. The organization of film have to deliberately act up to the expectations of audience out of their financial purpose.
Future Film Producers. This study would give them knowledge and understanding on how to be creative and critical in producing independent films. This will provide them insights on ethical standards, limitations and violations when it comes to the following issues being discussed in relation to the themes of movies produced.