Like that cinematography post I did a while back, here's another post on things I'm probably not qualified to talk about, or capable of thinking through the whole way. But whatever. I've been sitting on this one for a while, and it's become a bunch of different things. So many picture-less, rambling posts these days!
Something I wonder about frequently is one's ability to become great. Then I get all tangled up in what it means to be great, who I view to be great, why, and what the hell that all means.
I read a lot of books about film. A lot of interviews with directors, producers, and cinematographers. A lot of historical criticism. And the more I am told that there is some formulae to all this, the less I believe it, and the less gullible I feel. Certain talk of cinema in classes in school are particularly abrasive to me because lately of their tendency to be overbearing - applying so many rules to something that can essentially be anything.
And not only just anything, it can mean any number of anythings to any number of people.
And not only just anything, it can mean any number of anythings to any number of people.
Then I come up against the wall of: if it's worth existing I guess you've got to debate the hell out of it. I am not at home in the classical debate theatre. I do not debate well, I never have. Perhaps this is why I have found alternative routes around traditional arguments to find myself here, or what I think film should be capable of.
What I don't enjoy is the debates about a kind of cinema that trumps all. Putting one work, one artist above all others. A lot of film students put those great films above all others, films that aren't necessarily their favourites, but they are heralded and talked about and watched an exhaustive number of times. Does it speak to something they aspire to? Or something that speaks to them professionally? Do they want to emulate it's greatness? I. Just. Don't. Even. Know. I just get a hard time when I haven't seen them for lack of interest, or can't recall who did what.
What also astounds me is this ability humans have to put one man above the rest - especially in cinema, which in all popular veins, is made by hundreds of people, not a solitary man. Something I'm very wary of these days, is the unadulterated idolization of those classic titans of cinema. Those who can do no wrong. I find that dichotomy interesting - perhaps most between film student/amateur filmmaker and those titans. I have been guilty of this as well - different filmmakers have gone through the certified 'do-no-wrong' zone. But what we forget is that we are made of the same stuff as them. Respect is one thing - but I suppose my problem here is celebrity-grade idolization, and subsequent regurgitation (reboots) of whatever material.
You can look at cinema as an object, a social nicety, an art-form, a business, a 'mechanical reproduction'. It's bipolar nature as an art form and as an entertainment token really fascinates me. The arguments blaming technical advancement for the decline of art in cinema - the cooing over new digital frontiers - the exhaustive amount of films in existence. Is the point at which Hollywood reaches it's bursting point the same point that the average movie-goer realizes there is a world outside of the Hollywood blockbusters and the independent can thrive? Cinema itself can serve as such a large platter of topics and debates - and the ideas that cinema can showcase can offer every experience, every immersion in life - and through these presentations, it can bear an even larger array of conflicts, questions, propositions, and answers.
What also astounds me is this ability humans have to put one man above the rest - especially in cinema, which in all popular veins, is made by hundreds of people, not a solitary man. Something I'm very wary of these days, is the unadulterated idolization of those classic titans of cinema. Those who can do no wrong. I find that dichotomy interesting - perhaps most between film student/amateur filmmaker and those titans. I have been guilty of this as well - different filmmakers have gone through the certified 'do-no-wrong' zone. But what we forget is that we are made of the same stuff as them. Respect is one thing - but I suppose my problem here is celebrity-grade idolization, and subsequent regurgitation (reboots) of whatever material.
You can look at cinema as an object, a social nicety, an art-form, a business, a 'mechanical reproduction'. It's bipolar nature as an art form and as an entertainment token really fascinates me. The arguments blaming technical advancement for the decline of art in cinema - the cooing over new digital frontiers - the exhaustive amount of films in existence. Is the point at which Hollywood reaches it's bursting point the same point that the average movie-goer realizes there is a world outside of the Hollywood blockbusters and the independent can thrive? Cinema itself can serve as such a large platter of topics and debates - and the ideas that cinema can showcase can offer every experience, every immersion in life - and through these presentations, it can bear an even larger array of conflicts, questions, propositions, and answers.
I would love to shoot in every genre, every location, with every method of director, actor, and kind of crew. Film is a rampant exploration of the individual behavioural mind, and that of the greater hive. It can guide us, reveal to us, change us. It can explore every other art form, it can explore itself. And it can explore in every sense of the word, in every perspective. I really do love it, I love it a lot.
Would it be great to become great? Maybe. Great to who? I don't know. I'm 22, I frequently forget how old/young I am, I've shortlisted what I want in life (kids, house, career in cinematography til I die of old age). Greatness can't really be on that list as something to be accomplished, I don't think. It's more like what you get at the end of a long road of learning the hard way, little victories, and triumphs. Well, it's more of a drunkenly-woven path through the underbrush than a road, I guess. But hey, beggars can't be choosers.
Would it be great to become great? Maybe. Great to who? I don't know. I'm 22, I frequently forget how old/young I am, I've shortlisted what I want in life (kids, house, career in cinematography til I die of old age). Greatness can't really be on that list as something to be accomplished, I don't think. It's more like what you get at the end of a long road of learning the hard way, little victories, and triumphs. Well, it's more of a drunkenly-woven path through the underbrush than a road, I guess. But hey, beggars can't be choosers.
I suppose, in my last year of school, it's important for me to figure out where I sit with all of this. Absorbing as much as I can, before the real world comes knocking. I'm not built to critique, but I can absorb it and learn from it, I suppose.
Well, I had another whole half to this blog post that was completely unrelated. So I guess I'll just create another venting blog post, one with even more personal... accoutrement. I hope autumn has arrived with a pleasant chill for everyone. It's tea-city all up in here. Toes are cold, though.
I'm listening to Christmas music already. Is that bad?
Things to look at:
Who has good tea? Banff has good tea.
This article on online dating as a lady in your twenties.
GIF Dance Party
No comments:
Post a Comment