Discussion Thread: What films do you feel are most important to cinema.

[Sandman138]

This is a thread for the review, discussion, and hopefuly the examination of films that you feel have been important to the development of cinema. What about these films have made the artform what it is today. What films have offered new techniques, created conventions, and otherwise helped shaped the medium as we know it today?

 

[Poetic Chaos]

Star Wars and Jurassic Park.

 

[Sandman138]

Discussion Thread, no one word statements around here.

Battleship Potyomkin
Director: Sergei M. Eisenstein
1925

The first time I saw this film, I was floored. It was so remarkably different from silent cinema I had seen up to that point. The seconed time I saw it I hated it, I think it was uncomfortable seating that biased my opinion, but regardless, that opinion stuck for quite a while. Now I love it again. There are few filmmakers that truely defined (thougn I will argue that they discovered) the grammer of film, of course there was D.W Griffith. However, Lev Kuleshov, whose expirement gave rise to what is known as the Kuleshov Effect*, was instrumental in discovering one of the fundamental elements of films nature. His work influenced Eisenstein who developed the theory of montage. Simply stated, montage holds that the juxtaposition of two seperate images creates a context that was not present in either of the images alone. This seems simple enough, but consider the films L'Arrivée d'un train à la Ciotat, Le Jardinier, or even Le Voyage Dans La Lune. While L'Arrivée d'un train à la Ciotat is for lack of a better term, newsreel (though if the myths are true it was certianly more spectacular to its audience than such a dispcription would imply) the other two films have a narrative going on, and Le Voyage Dans Las Lune even has cuts. However, all three seem to document their stories far more than tell them in a narrative sense. Compare that to Kuleshov's experiment and the difference in technique is striking already, compare it to the steps sequence in Battleship Potyomkin (44-55:22) and you can see the development of film a a visual narrative. If D.W Griffith gave film it's grammar, then Kuleshov and Eisenstein figured out a big part of why it works. More to the point, I would argue that Griffith set certain conventions, some of them very fundamental, but for the most part, I would consider their linguistic equivelent to be akin to surface structures. Montage has much more in common with universal grammar. This film and Eisenstein's other work, including his writings on the subject, are a fundamental contributor to the artform.

* I'm not sure if this link will work, but Oxford Journals has a very interesting essay on the Kuleshov effect from the lens of Cognitive Science.

 

[Edd Extraordinaire]

Jaws, Chinatown, The Godfather, Taxi Driver, Star Wars OT.

 

[StarWarsAgent]

Star Wars: A new Hope. It changed everyone. It changed the directors, the artists, the workers of this country. People realized the money comes from making movies. Specially, Sci-fi movies like Star Wars. Lucas created the Blockbuster idea, the toy marketing and commecialism based on films.

Star Wars made Harrison Ford who he is today. One of the greatest actors of all time. Also Lucas created ideas..Believe it or not, if it wasn't for him, the internet probably wouldn't exist.

It also made people think and get into astronomy, teaching, science..So it had an impact in carreer choices..it also created interest in NASA and the Star Wars laser regan program.

I can't tell you how much people Star Wars changed. it made presidents, students, CEO's directors and artists..

Star Wars had a huge impact in commercial engineering, Auto makers like TOYOTA and HONDA..and still to this day, people are working on Robotics as seen in Star Wars. Everyone I talk to at the comic con say Star Wars has affected their life one way or another. So you see, Starwars is more than a movie, it's american culture.

 

[Edd Extraordinaire]

Kind of like Christianity?

 

[Sandman138]

Discussion Thread, no one word statements around here.

This isn't a thread for just listing off movies. The idea is that you discuss what these movies have added to the craft, how they have helped shape it. Hopefully through this discussion we can start to explore what it is that makes film work on certain fundamental levels.

 

[Sandman138]

Star Wars: A new Hope. It changed everyone. It changed the directors, the artists, the workers of this country. People realized the money comes from making movies. Specially, Sci-fi movies like Star Wars. Lucas created the Blockbuster idea, the toy marketing and commecialism based on films.

Star Wars made Harrison Ford who he is today. One of the greatest actors of all time. Also Lucas created ideas..Believe it or not, if it wasn't for him, the internet probably wouldn't exist.

It also made people think and get into astronomy, teaching, science..So it had an impact in carreer choices..it also created interest in NASA and the Star Wars laser regan program.

I can't tell you how much people Star Wars changed. it made presidents, students, CEO's directors and artists..

Star Wars had a huge impact in commercial engineering, Auto makers like TOYOTA and HONDA..and still to this day, people are working on RObotics as seen in Star Wars. Everyone I talk to at the comic con say Star Wars affected their life one way or another. So you see, Starwars is more than a movie, it's american culture.

I will grant you that Star Wars changed film marketing quite substantialy, and that it has become a lasting element in American, and Global Popular Culture. But this thread is not so much about the relationship between film and culture (though that study does benifit the exploration of the creation of conventions. For example, how has Japanese cinema evolved differently from American cinema and why?) as much as it is about how these films have shaped the artform. How have they created the conventions, and perhaps discovered the universal grammar of motion pictures that comprise what we take for granted as the cinematic experience.

 

[StarWarsAgent]

I will grant you that Star Wars changed film marketing quite substantialy, and that it has become a lasting element in American, and Global Popular Culture. But this thread is not so much about the relationship between film and culture (though that study does benifit the exploration of the creation of conventions. For example, how has Japanese cinema evolved differently from American cinema and why?) as much as it is about how these films have shaped the artform. How have they created the conventions, and perhaps discovered the universal grammar of motion pictures that comprise what we take for granted as the cinematic experience.

You want this discussion on a Message Board? Sounds more like a college course. I don't think you will succeed here. As I have observed most have all but HS ed.

Star Wars had an impact on recent Japanese movies. See all their recent films have used tons of CGI. American films like the Matrix and Star Wars have pushed the envelope for foreign films now..they are making movies in english now. but it all started with star wars.

 

[bluejake01]

Star Wars: A new Hope. It changed everyone. It changed the directors, the artists, the workers of this country. People realized the money comes from making movies. Specially, Sci-fi movies like Star Wars. Lucas created the Blockbuster idea, the toy marketing and commecialism based on films.

Star Wars made Harrison Ford who he is today. One of the greatest actors of all time. Also Lucas created ideas..Believe it or not, if it wasn't for him, the internet probably wouldn't exist.

It also made people think and get into astronomy, teaching, science..So it had an impact in carreer choices..it also created interest in NASA and the Star Wars laser regan program.

I can't tell you how much people Star Wars changed. it made presidents, students, CEO's directors and artists..

Star Wars had a huge impact in commercial engineering, Auto makers like TOYOTA and HONDA..and still to this day, people are working on Robotics as seen in Star Wars. Everyone I talk to at the comic con say Star Wars has affected their life one way or another. So you see, Starwars is more than a movie, it's american culture.

Sci-Fi in general had already accomplished many of the things you credit Star Wars with, on a smaller scale. George Lucas did a lot of things in desperation that turned out very well, but he had a lot of help. His greatest dissatisfactions in life came from his lack of creative control over the original trilogy. When no one believed in him or his ideas, he hired an artist (MacQuarrie) that helped refine and shape his vision. Darth Vader, Threepio, Arrtoo and even Coruscant would not exist in the way we know them without MacQuarrie. It was the strength of those paintings that got a producer behind him. They had no money and so marketing became a means to an end.

Now, Star Wars did change American Cinema, but with every advance we can credit to Star Wars, comes another bloated excess that we can also blame Star Wars for. The idea of the blockbuster nearly killed Cinema as an art form...merchandising is now a sad reminder of the film industry's greed. I am reminded of Spaceballs the Toilet Paper...

George Lucas is an idea man...some ideas were good, some were bad...but he had the drive, the balls and the dedication to make history. However, the brilliance of the Original Trilogy, and the richness of the EU is a testament to many, many other more creative and talented people than Lucas himself. He has always known how to surround himself with greatness, and thus appear great himself.

 

[Sandman138]

On the other hand, he made THX-1138, and it's kind of hard to knock that one.

 

[bluejake01]

I have to be honest...I went to film school, but didn't find it as beneficial as I had hoped. Film is an art, but foremost it is a craft. When it is crafted poorly, it is painfully obvious, but it can still be enjoyable and artistic...just not a good film. Ultimately the greatest function a film can have is to remove someone from their own life and insert them into another. Whether it be a small human story, a grand epic, a horror, a fantasy, or an adventure it should alter your perceptions...give the viewer a vicarious outlet...show them the wonders that exist in the world, or another human beings imagination. It is able to paint a picture more completely than any other artform. It is visual, and auditory and can touch a very primal place in our conciousness.

 

[bluejake01]

On the other hand, he made THX-1138, and it's kind of hard to knock that one.

I can find a lot of ways...but I will save them for another day.

 

[bluejake01]

I think Lucas' best film is American Grafitti. It captures so perfectly a moment in time...it is a historical document that never happened, yet happened to every American teen of that era. Spectsoft is based in Oakdale, which is very close to Modesto. The people of that area of that generation are so deeply affected by that film because it tells their story.

 

[Sandman138]

La Jetee
Director: Chris Marker
1962

The inspiration for the equally amazing film 12 Monkeys, La Jetee is notable film not only for its story, but because the film furthers the exploration of montage. Composed almost entirely of still photographs, the film nevertheless tells a powerful narrative. Although it is not entirely free from diegesis, in the form of a narrator, the juxtapostion of these images is still the driving force behind the film. Each new shot creates a new context revealing a great deal of information and emotion that the narrator cannot. I'm in a computer course this semester based on the idea of creating a program that can make some kind of creative decision on its own. I'm hoping to get at some of film's "universal grammar" and "deep structure" by making a program that can create short films in a similar style to La Jetee.

 

[Sandman138]

BTW for those that haven't seen the films that have come up so far. When I put the film as a link, it goes to either quicktime or google video, so you can see them for yourself without having to pay money. Which means you should, because they are good or at the very least will leave you more versed in film history.

 

[Sandman138]

I have to be honest...I went to film school, but didn't find it as beneficial as I had hoped. Film is an art, but foremost it is a craft. When it is crafted poorly, it is painfully obvious, but it can still be enjoyable and artistic...just not a good film. Ultimately the greatest function a film can have is to remove someone from their own life and insert them into another. Whether it be a small human story, a grand epic, a horror, a fantasy, or an adventure it should alter your perceptions...give the viewer a vicarious outlet...show them the wonders that exist in the world, or another human beings imagination. It is able to paint a picture more completely than any other artform. It is visual, and auditory and can touch a very primal place in our conciousness.

Yes, but what are the rules of that craft? Why do they work? Walter Murch talked about trying to develop a notation for film in Ondaajte's The Conversations: Walter Murch and the Art of Editing Film. He states that film is in its infancy and likens it to music before notation or architecture before scale models. You can play a tune or build a castle on an instinctual level, and it will work, but you won't know why. Furthermore, without notation in music, you lose things like scales and much of what makes music we take for granted so complex. I'm very interested in the idea of developing a notation for film (so much that I am devoting my study in college to just that) because if such a "deep structure" could be found, the complexities that could become available to the "surface structure" could be incredible.

 

[bluejake01]

I am not one that thinks in a linear fashion...so my mind immediately jumps to Terry Gilliam. A true American visionary...A man whose films are so off beat, yet so perfectly comforting they lull you into his unique hyper-reality gently. There is nothing jarring, or abrupt in the way he pulls the audience in, but by the end of his films you realize reality is really ****ing dull.

 

[bluejake01]

Yes, but what are the rules of that craft? Why do they work? Walter Murch talked about trying to develop a notation for film in Ondaajte's The Conversations: Walter Murch and the Art of Editing Film. He states that film is in its infancy and likens it to music before notation or architecture before scale models. You can play a tune or build a castle on an instinctual level, and it will work, but you won't know why. Furthermore, without notation in music, you lose things like scales and much of what makes music we take for granted so complex. I'm very interested in the idea of developing a notation for film (so much that I am devoting my study in college to just that) because if such a "deep structure" could be found, the complexities that could become available to the "surface structure" could be incredible.

I have always been about deconstruction...give me punk over pop...Pop has all the elements, all proper scales and structure, but in the end it is flat. I wanty something far more guttural or visceral. A raw exploration of someone's imagination draws me in far more than well crafted, lifeless film can.

 

[Sandman138]

But even punk is still playing by certian universal rules. Indeed, I've always been of the notion that deconstruction is about reducing something to its bare essentials. It doesn't have to be clean to have a structure. My argument is that all these films that we think are "breaking the rules" are really working on a deeper structure that we don't understand yet.

 

[bluejake01]

But even punk is still playing by certian universal rules. It doesn't have to be clean to have a structure. My argument is that all these films that we think are "breaking the rules" are really working on a deeper structure that we don't understand yet.

Maybe...but I don't want to know what that structure is...anymore than I want to know why I prefer caramel to chocolate, or sandalwood to patchuli.

 

[The Amazing Lee]

One of the films I am going to have to say is "Pulp Fiction"

Many people will disagree with me here, because some people think that Quentin Tarentino has stolen ideas and made them his own. BUT one of the important reasons why I've firstly added it to my list, is the fact that it's one of the films that media teachers like to teach their students.

If it didn't have any major significance in the film world, than teachers wouldn't teach it.

Obviously there is more reason than this. I wouldn't call it one of my favourite films at present but it's a nice little film that represents a number of different stories.

What makes it significant is the fact that the story is played in NO chronological order at all. There is also no exact plot at all except for the fact that it is based around small time gangsters going about their daily lives.

I am sure that there HAVE been films that have used this technique before Quentin Tarentino did, but this film is known by most people that watch movies of any variety because of it's love from the critics and also the general public and also because it's one of the most successful and well-known to do so.

If this film was placed in chronological order...I doubt the film would have reached the critical acclaim that it has done.

This is why I feel that this film is also important in cinematic development.

If people disagree or feel that I could have added on some important parts to this post...than please reply and I'll see what I can do

 

[Sandman138]

Maybe...but I don't want to know what that structure is...anymore than I want to know why I prefer caramel to chocolate, or sandalwood to patchuli.

That last one's easy... patchuli smells like ass.

 

[ultimatefan]

2001 - One of the movies that helped to change the perception that science fiction was "b-movie material", which still was a pretty strong notion in Hollywood. It was one of the first sci-fi movies to feature convincing FX, and probably one of the most ambitious movies of all time, with a story told mostly in silence, through stunning use of cinematography and music, that covers thousands of years of human evolution in a single feature. It´s also one of the most belovingly enigmatic movies of all time - is the black monolith an aleph? Is it God? what is the house in the end of the movie? Imaggery such as the ape beating the bones with Thus Spoke Zarathustra and Hal 9000 begging for its existence with more humanity than his flesh and bone adversary will be embedded in the collective consciousness for centuries to come.

 

[Sandman138]

Hal 9000 begging for its existence with more humanity than his flesh and bone adversary will be embedded in the collective consciousness for centuries to come.

Humanity Going to HAL: The Art of Understatement in 2001 is an interesting essay about the Kuleshov Effect and how it gives life to HAL.