> Losey, Polanski, Bergman, Fassbinder, Coen, Fellini,
Roeg, Huston,
Welles,
> Weir
> -- all of them have tremendous
> artistic distinction, all control their projects to
a very large
> extent (certain exceptions of studio interference
easily noted), and
> I would therefore advance the thesis that none of
them ever made
> a "bad" film. We need everything they
did.
That's a pretty good theory you got there. If only Uwe Boll
and Ed Wood had an indisputable theory that "proved" that
they never made a bad film... Sorry, just kidding.
I'm afraid we're at the turning point of an "auteur theory"
discussion that will only end in stalemate. There's no
denying those are truly great filmmakers, but there is no way
any artist's work is above criticism, especially in a
pop-culture medium. To dismiss weak films doesn't diminish
the value of the great ones. What if the director was having
an off-day? What if the budget didn't allow for the author's
true vision? What if the actor was drunk and gave a lousy
performance? There are too many variables that go into
filmmaking.
In a medium like film that requires hundreds of people
working together, it's difficult to declare the whole project
the work of one single man (there are no women on your best
director's list.) That's dismissing the creative input of
other contributors; cinematographers, screenwriters, editors,
composers, producers... etc.
To bring this back to crime literature, it's much easier to
declare the entire body of work as belonging to a singular
vision in writing.
In that case, Ed Wood never wrote a bad book,
either.
----------
--Chan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 12 Nov 2007 EST