Journal Survey 3

I chose Bernard’s article, “Life in Film”. In this article film makers describe films that heavily influenced them. Bernard states she had never seen “A film that could do something, rather than simply be about something”. This means that a film could actually change the course of media, rather than just tell a story. This idea was revolutionary to her. She also iterates the way in which Snow’s “Wavelength” made her think about sound, space, and time. Bernard also iterates films depth in terms of time, noting a films ability to cause anticipation of the future observation of the present, and the retaining of the past. She also iterates a documentaries ability to not tell the truth. Bernard is constantly examining the relationship between the form of a film as a portal between the actual and the imagined. The author in this article makes their points through example and explanation. I believe films as texts are blue prints into the workings of a single directors thought process. Each process can be reverse engineered, and taken into consideration as a means to be creatively reapplied. The difference between filmmakers is the way in which it is reapplied. If this is done correctly the result is often incomparable to the original. This permutation of the original is unrecognizable in its new context. In my opinion it is impossible to skew toward audience expectations and still maintain creative autonomy. Sacrificing creative autonomy means losing something unique to the film’s core. While the benefits of this action may lead to short term success or a “blockbuster” this does not secure a film’s artistic integrity. These films are occasionally discarded over the test of time while the legendary films rarely falter.

To Read Article -> Click here