 |
| The animation which i was interested in early days,this photo is an outcome of my interests..hope the heroine forgives me:) Just like this,movies are just wishful distortion of fancies,facts animated to satisfy us emotionally.. |
 |
|
I can never agree that director should be the first person to be credited against the movie,director job is justifying the script and enhancing it on execution.The first importance in a movie team should be given to writer and second to actor.Guys like Speilberg are powerful and smart to grab the right scripts and associate their name with them...what great deal in directing ,its just passion and trial and error mechanism,story board,camera position are just a confirmity of execution.Some might say that,except anyone can write a screenplay. It takes a master filmmaker with SKILL to actually put it on screen effectively.People who support that directors contribution to cinema is high might say,a lot of times, the script for a film won't even be very good, so it takes a great filmmaker to make it look convincing. John Ford, Howard Hawks, John Huston and various others had this type of skill- as has Spielberg. It's unfortunate that films are so often labelled "A film by... DIRECTOR" when the project was the brainchild of an incredibly skillful writer. But that's all to do with politics and marketing and not reason. Unfortunately people who don't know much about filmmaking take it at face value. To me it only makes sense if the director wrote the film as well, or AT LEAST originated the idea. Screenwriting is about understanding story-structure, character etc. as well as finding original ideas that are both personal and universal."As long as a person knows how to correctly format their screenplay, it's a piece of cake. They talk all about this in the "Screenwriting for Dummies" edition."If there was a formula for writing a great screenplay and you just needed the faculty of writing there would lots more screenwriters around churning out tons of great scripts. There aren't. "There are certainly writers whose skills are unsurpassed, but it is clearly harder to be a director than it is to be a writer."Clearly? Based on what? They are two extremely different disciplines.Strange that the screenplay is a mess when writing one is "a piece of cake" and the writers are incredibly talented men who were all taught to write at school.Then I suggest you watch the older films of Ford, Capra, Curtiz and various other filmmakers who often did not write their films but were still able to direct the scripts with gusto."I have watched Ford and Capra and Curtiz. They are great directors. They also happened to work with great screenwriters. I assume you believe you could just hand them a terrible script and their 'gusto' would turn it into a work of genius. Thousands of screenplays are written each year. Most of them are terrible. This is because writing a good screenplay is incredibly hard. The eternal search in the film world is not for the "hot director" but for the "hot script", because it is almost impossible to come by. Many excellent directors spend their lives in search of it. Film is a collaborative medium and directing is of course extremely important and not at all easy.Well, yes, it's possible. To refer to other filmmakers,people may say that Kubrick's screenplay for Killer's Kiss isn't all that good; it's purely his visual style that makes the film worth seeing. Then, look at a filmmaker like Cassavetes, who made Shadows entirely on improvisation. Also, look at some of the modern filmmakers.There are few friends,sho used to say De Palma, for example, took the weak script for Mission to Mars and turned it into a movie that was actually worth seeing- because his visual gimmicks made the whole movie.We shouldnt be prejudiced in arriving truth becasue of being of emotioanlly inclined.I have the honesty and passion to arrive truth by questioning!!Probably there is a image of a directors job being intellectual,imaginative and other stuffs.You are understanding the image ,not the actual thing.A script is not some blueprint that the director just follows. There are infinite ways in which to film a certain scene,but i feel infinite ways is glorified.Shooting script with camera angle notes and other stuffs would be there.David Fincher says "People will say, 'There are a million ways to shoot a scene,' but I don't think so. I think there're two, maybe.one is right and the other one is wrong". Ultimately its the content we agree that makes a emotional impact and story or character is what makes an everlasting impression,whereas the visual extravaganza created by director is a luxury.
Directors doesnt bring life to the scene,wheras he just guides the actors,cameraman,composer to make sure that life they create are not out of place or missing.The awareness of audience pulse and aesthetics sense is enough to be a director. .My intention is to throw light on myth of film directors job ratherthen letting them down.Just want to understand the genuine contribution of a film director.Kurosowa says"With a good script, a good director can produce a masterpiece. With the same script, a mediocre director can produce a passable film. But with a bad script even a good director can't possibly make a good film. For truly cinematic expression, the camera and the microphone must be able to cross both fire and water. The script must be something that has the power to do this." Hitchcock says "To make a great film you need three things - the script, the script and the script".If you give five directors the same script, you'll have five vastly different films,it would be based on aesthetic inclination of the director.That is the treatment of story may vary slightly,if its a powerful director like sergi leone or kubrick,the percentage would be little high. Im sure 2001:a space odyssey would have been much greater movie,if Kubrick didnt direct it.If somebody like joel schumacher could direct,(or somebody who can give fast movie)he would be right on spot with the story,besides Kubricks visual extravaganza would be missed.But i am sure anyone would agree that first 15 minutes ape sequence and complications Kubrick does on literary material he adapts could have been avoided and bigger audience would there for 2001. i dont know on what basis you say im sweeping statements,I am finding little hard to understand what you have written,its little disorganised.But you being an aspiring film maker,you would be the right person to say what exactly the directors job is.
I agree director can enhance by getting good,appropriate work from all departments of film making,probably he is jack of all,master of none. Script in words absolutely is a essntial prerequiste,if there is no well crafted scripts,stop making movies,making dinaosaurs to fight with godzilla and stupid imitations like hide and seek (from the sixth sense)are waste of money and time.Directors corrections in all departments would help a little bit.We are going to get people from various departments who are experts in theirs,its not directors who is going to teach.Its a team work,Can you tell me what would be the percentage of his own ideas in the following departments: script acting camera compsoer sets costume editing The first 15 minutes ape sequence,and other parts which was really slow and dragging.I really loved Arthur C Clarke story,but story was complicted(or little ruined).The thing i appreciate about Kubrick is his visual presentation.Assume if someone gives Arthur C Clarkes wonderful story to James Cameron tio make a movie,how the output would be.A while back, directors had little recognition until Citizen Kane came out. Before that, if I'm not mistaken, it was the cinematographers who really got recognized.The nature of profession is not well understood amongst people and media.Anyways actors are well paid,popular comapred to directors and everyone,Hitler had moustache inspired from Chaplin,such is the power of actors
Final conclusion SCRIPT IS ABSOLUTE PREREQUISTE FOR THE MEDIUM OF CINEMA,WHICH IS A MEDIUM OF STORY TELLING.ACTING,DIRECTING,COMPOSING IS THE ORDER OF IMPORTANCE IN MOVIE MAKING.
Finally on the words tamil film acting masetro Sivaji Ganesan(1928-2001) the film is a teamwork of intelligent people.
Screenplay on eyes of movie champions:
To make a great
film you need three things - the script, the script and the script.
=Alfred
Hitchcock(1899-1980)-Director
of 61 movies in a career spanning of 51
years in film industry
One
major rule in screenplay is that there is no rule
=Maniratnam(Director of 20 movies including
trendsetter like Kanathil Muthamittal, Roja,Bombay,Iruvar,Guru)
The fundamental
of anything as a director is material, material, material - script, script,
script - once you have the script everything else is straightforward.
=Ridley Scott(Director of
19 movies,including Gladiator,Alien)
With a good script, a good director can
produce a masterpiece. With the same script, a mediocre director can produce a
passable film. But with a bad script even a good director can't possibly make a
good film. For truly cinematic expression, the camera and the microphone must
be able to cross both fire and water. The script must be something that has the
power to do this
=Akira Kurosawa(1910-1998)-Director of 31 movies including
trend setter Seven Samurai(1954)Rashomon(1950)
I write scripts to serve as skeletons awaiting
the flesh and sinew of images
Ingmar Bergman(1918-2007)-Director and writer of 44 movies
including Seventh seal,Wild strawberries in a career spanning of 40years
The script is what you've dreamed up-this is
what it should be
Comments