Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[XavierAlex]

One theoretical framework pervasive with film is Auteur theory, the idea that the director is like an author of a book. While many may swear by certain directors as they would philosophers and writers and thinkers, the production of a film is collaborative. I perhaps am guilty of swearing by certain directors and ignoring others. But the topic I bring up is: how much does the director control--with some directors it can be different than others; are directors like authors or should the collaborative nature be acknowledged and held as highly as Auteur theory?

Screenplay writers are known for having their screenplays torn apart and remade into film. Should screenplay writers get more credit than they do?

To make it a more personal question, how do you select your films? Do you go by directors, producers, screenplay writers, time of day, price of popcorn, actors?

Finally, is Auteur theory bunk?

[Suichoy]

I choose my films based on the director. I have never chosen a film based on the screenwriter.

I believe that if a director is good, such that he is able to manipulate the stylistic aspects of the film in such a way that he can project his own unique aesthetic or directorial voice, then he is more important than the screenwriter. If a director is able to make full use of the levers available to him for shaping the end product of film, then I believe he has a greater influence on the outcome than the screenwriter. Whereas a good director can control cinematography, mise-en-scene, sound, and the editing, the screenwriter can control only the narrative (or non-narrative) structure of the film. Which I admit is extremely significant! But so is the work of the actors and actresses, cameramen, costume designers, concept artists, animators, sound designers, composers, etc.

It depends what you think a film is. If you think of a film as a story acted out in front of a camera, then the screenwriter's work is crucial. But if you see a film as a multimedia experience with visuals and sound in which narrative is merely one dimension, then the director controls more than the screenwriter. But as I said above, not all directors have the mastery to become the auteur.

[Namthebabe]

I have no set preference. I'll watch anything provided it is well written and acted.

[A Poster He or I]

I don't think auteur theory is bunk; I simply think most directors are not auteurs. An auteur is a director whose stylistic imprint upon a film is unambiguously present, or even pervasive, to the extent that one seeks out their stylistic "signature" as a primary element to appreciate, regardless of whether the film is otherwise appealing. Personally, I have this attitude toward the films of Kubrick, Kurasawa, Tarkovsky, and Tim Burton.

It can also work in reverse: I tend to avoid Spielberg's movies because his pervasive signature upon the result inevitably undermines the film's appeal altogether.

By contrast, I've liked most of Sydney Pollack's films but find no distinctive elements to associate with Pollack's style that specifically draw me to his films. So to me, Pollack is no auteur.

[Alias]

I am more inclined to choose films negatively: Please, no zombies, supernatural cannibal children, drooling beasts with huge teeth, projectile bleeding, protracted rape or torture scenes. I'm all for directors, writers and actors who avoid that stuff.

[Philo_ben]

One theoretical framework pervasive with film is Auteur theory, the idea that the director is like an author of a book. While many may swear by certain directors as they would philosophers and writers and thinkers, the production of a film is collaborative. I perhaps am guilty of swearing by certain directors and ignoring others. But the topic I bring up is: how much does the director control--with some directors it can be different than others; are directors like authors or should the collaborative nature be acknowledged and held as highly as Auteur theory?

Screenplay writers are known for having their screenplays torn apart and remade into film. Should screenplay writers get more credit than they do?

To make it a more personal question, how do you select your films? Do you go by directors, producers, screenplay writers, time of day, price of popcorn, actors?

Finally, is Auteur theory bunk?

Hi. Well, I would assume that directors have a pretty fair amount of control. Second, I believe that screenwriters don't necessarily deserve more credit. Third, and a great question: I just follow my instincts, I guess. Finally, I don't think that the Auteur theory is bunk.

[Tor_Hershman]

X. Alex's mention of The Price Of Popcorn has MUCH to do with showbiz's creations; however Showism do exist, too.

Showism is when the popcorn profits have no bearing upon whether or not a work/worker is promoted/distributed or suppressed/ignored.

Let's see...I like, of course, Hitchcock and am a member of The Church of Ed Wood.

[Eonblue]

In some cases people unknowingly give praise to the screenwriting aspect of a movie. Pulp fiction for example was written by Tarantino in the non-linear fashion that has made it one of the most enthralling and confusing stories in cinema history. Another example would be the writer of Amores Perros, 21 Grams, and Babel; Guillermo Aguirre. These movies are not known for their director. It's the story the draws you in. It's the character struggle and their eventual resolution that keeps me drawn in. I can watch the stylistic directing of Kubricks 2001:A Space Odyssey and enjoy it but all that vision has no substance. A director is merely a conduit for the screenwriters energy and vision. It's a shame that some of these guys don't get as much credit as the director. The director is like the conductor of the orchestra except instead of playing a song their recording a movie and the screenwriter is the composer.

Fun fact. One of the most praised scenes in movie history is the Ride of the Valkyries scene in Apocalypse now. Most people assume that was Coppola's idea but it was the screenwriters John Milius. "Charlie dont surf" and "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" were his original lines. Coppola actually lucked out when Brando showed up 60 pounds overweight with a totally different idea of how to act Kurtz. Coppola and Millius had the movies ending in a climatic knife fight between Kurtz and Willard. I personally like the sacrifice ending much more. It carries much more weight for the watcher.

To answer your questions. I choose my movies by director and screenwriter. I try to catch any movie that has one awards at the major film festivals in Europe.

I don't think Auteur theory is bunk but if it attempts to put a director in a category that would essential say the screenwriter is separate from the end product I don't agree.