catalogue first draft

Catalogue draft

Films :

• Midnight in Paris(2011)Directed by Woody Allen[Film].France: Sony Pictures Classics.
  One of the reasons I chose this as my focus film is because it’s one of the newly released films of Woody Allen. By analyzing it, I can prove not only that Woody has a unique style qualifying him as an auteur, but also that he is still relevant and should be appreciated. This film combines his most classic filming and scripting techniques which can be identified in his earlier work. These techniques have not only made him famous but his movies too; they are highly ranked by many respected critics. His new surprising and exciting  methods prove he has not run out of ideas, but he is still original and devoted to film making.  
• Manhattan (1979) Directed by Woody Allen [Film]. USA: United Artists.
  I also chose this film by Woody Allen as this is one of his earliest films  and can show his style at the beginning of his career compared to the present. The similarities between show he has been consistent with his work. One of these similarities is the presence of the main ‘Woody Character’ which people believe is the reflection of the director’s personality, another example of being an auteur. This film is also one of his pieces of work according to film critics, showing that he has kept this formula consistent in order to create quality movies not due to the lack of creativity.
• To Rome with Love (2012) Directed by Woody Allen [Film]. Italy: Medusa Distribuzione.
  The reason I chose this film is because this is also a more recent film by Woody Allen. In this case the film has not been received as well and has been described as one of the worst Allen films. By comparing it to the other two films I have chosen, it does share some of the similarities which shows these formulas he follows do not mean success. This film can example he might not be the extremely talented director everybody claims he is, but there are also many more films that did not disappoint. An argument can be created that he is a good director, maybe even a true auteur but even he does not create the best product sometimes.

 

Other sources:

Abrams, S. (2014) Simply do it: Talking with Woody Allen about directorial style | interviews. Available at: http://www.rogerebert.com/interviews/simply-do-it-talking-with-woody-allen-about-directorial-style (Accessed: 6 October 2016).

This article is one of two I have found with quotes straight from Woody Allen about his process of film mind and his directorial style. He mentions he never studied anything before jumping into this career and was never bothered about it. Instead he mentions he used his instinct and his gut feeling which has been rewarding so far. This suggests he has a natural talent when it comes to turning an idea on paper into a product on screen. Also the interviewer himself compared many of the movies through different micro techniques that can be identified and tried to understand the ones Allen tends to prefer shooting a film. All of the answers helps me build a list of the most predictable methods Woody would use and therefore further analyse Midnight in Paris in order to help my research.

Bell, J. and Stevens, B. (2011) ‘Woody Allen in the 21st century’, Sight&Sound (April), pp. 16–20.

This article was extremely useful to my research as it is relatively new and it goes through the main arguments I have encountered as I investigated the subject. The author discusses whether Allen’s repeated use of certain elements makes his films predictable and boring or if his style is so good that it makes them better. There is also an interview which again is a very reliable source of information. There are multiple authors for this article as well which indicates this opinion is not singular but a common one.

Björkman, S. (1993) Woody Allen on Woody Allen: In conversation with Stig Björkman. London: Faber and Faber Ltd.

 This book was a good source as it is also one of the only ones with quotes straight from Woody Allen himself, which makes the information given the most valid and reliable. Also this is part of a long book series with Stig Bjorkman who is a very good film critic. As the book was published in 1993, there is only an interview for Manhattan and none of my other chosen films. In the interview Allen talks about how he came to the fundamental ideas for this film and how even though they sounded crazy or weird he used them anyway. This shows that he was looking for something new and common to excite audiences but he still kept his other characteristics.

Burr, T. (2016) Here’s why Woody Allen is overrated. Available at: https://www.bostonglobe.com/arts/movies/2016/07/14/here-why-woody-allen-overrated/eCrIsQuae9thQJd6MWj7bL/story.html (Accessed: 6 October 2016).         

I chose this item because it explains why Woody Allen might not be as talented as he is seen and actually not an auteur at all. This article makes many good arguments backed up by examples which prove that he does not make good movies all the time and in fact he might just be using the same ideas in different context and getting  lucky. He also mentions To Rome with Love as one of the worst film Woody  has made.

Ebert, R. (2011) Midnight in Paris Review. Available at: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/midnight-in-paris-2011 (Accessed: 5 October 2016).

This review was very important as it was a positive article overall and it also came form a very reliable source; Roger Ebert is a very well known and appreciated film critic. He not only compliments the film immensely but also mentions some of the things he has observed as familiar in the film such as the neoralistic theme and the presence of the main ‘Woody character’.

 

Ebert, R. (2012) To Rome with Love Movie review. Available at: http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/to-rome-with-love-2012 (Accessed: 6 October 2016).

 This is also a review from Roger Ebert, but for this film he uses a more negative tone. He does not think this movie is as good as he would have expected a Woody Allen film to be. This not only shows that he has a reputation for good films, but also that there is no bias in this writing. This bad review also supports the reason I chose To Rome with Love as one of my films; Allen might not be the talented director is made to be by many articles, he might just get lucky. On the other hand the article doesn’t completely regard the film as horrible as there are certain parts which were good, but didn’t save the whole film in the end.

Heath, G. (2011) Cannes film festival 2011: Midnight in Paris, Bellflower, & sleeping beauty | the house next door. Available at: http://www.slantmagazine.com/house/article/cannes-film-festival-2011-day-one-midnight-in-paris-bellflower-sleeping-beauty (Accessed: 6 October 2016).

This film review is quite short but it includes quite a lot of opinions on the film and also how it was received at the Cannes festival that year. This festival is a very famous and highly regarded event which makes it important that it was liked and appreciated. Also Woody Allen quite often premiers his films here instead of Hollywood as he knows they not might be for everybody, only film makers and experts can fairly analyze his work.it also points to the fact that he is not making films for money and fame but to express his ideas and inspire other young film enthusiasts.

How to make a movie like Woody Allen (2015) Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/irrational-man/make_woody_allen_movie/ (Accessed: 13 October 2016).

This article was very insightful as the author mentions what they believe to be the characteristics of all Woody Allen movies. This is very useful as I can use these to build a list of micro and macro elements and separate them into new and typical techniques of the director. Furthermore the author goes on to say these might be present in all of his movies, but they are still exciting and unpredictable in the end. They also praise the director himself, complimenting his hard work ethic and appreciating the effort he puts into all of his films. This shows that he is and has been very passionate about filmmaking as well as unique, all qualities of an auteur.

Kermode, M. and Mayo, S. (2011) Midnight in Paris reviewed by Mark Kermode. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=mark+kermode+midnight+in+paris (Accessed: 2016).

This video source was very helpful as Mark Kermode himself mentions the similarities between Woody Allen’s movies Manhattan and Midnight in Paris, both films I have chosen. This backs up the idea that he has kept his style true. He also compliments both films, especially the new style that surfaces in the latest one; he remarks that the film starts in a very typical Woody Allen way but it surprises the audiences when it turns out to be new. Mark Kermode is also a very highly regarded film critics, who is known for being harsh but fair when analyzing a movie. This adds to the reliability of his opinion, making it trustworthy to use for my argument.

Newton, M. (2016) Woody Allen: Cinema’s great experimentalist. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/jan/13/woody-allen-michael-newton (Accessed: 6 October 2016).

I chose this source because it discusses Allen’s films as well as him as the man behind the scenes rather than him in his personal life. The opinion seems to be well backed up by reasons and objective. It was very useful as the article looks as his entire career to date, making points about many aspects of it over time. It also inspired my research as it mentioned many aspects of him I had not considered such as the fact He has inspired many people who have become good director’s. This shows he is a great example of a film maker. He is also called an experimentalist, which suggests he made his name by not sticking to the rules and trusting his instinct, quality of a true auteur.

Woody Allen - Awards (2014) in IMDB. Available at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000095/awards?ref_=nm_awd (Accessed: 2016).

This source was very useful as it listed all the nominations and awards won by Woody Allen. This was very useful as I made the observation that he has been nominated for hundreds of big awards such as Academy Awards and Golden Globes but has won only a very small amount of them. This supports my argument that people will compliment his work and his talent, as proved by the many nominations, but they will instead give the award to a more popular director or film, usually a blockbuster that is supported by a bigger production company.

Focus film sequence one - opening sequence analysis

0:00-4:08

Micro Techniques and relevance?   -camera -mise en scene -editing -sound	·         Establishing shots – range of angles and distances to buildings or people          ·         Jazz soundtrack                             - signature( telegraph article) ·         Voiceover conversation – heavy dialogue using many hyperboles -       Contrast between the two characters, immediately attracted to the male character- soft spoken and seemingly kind whereas the female character’s voice seems colder .   ·         None of the characters present for a long time ·         Little editing ·         Simplistic titling – unique font found in all his films      ·         Opening credits – signature, not used by many
Characterisation and relevance?	·        Gil is a romantic passionate artist. ( woody character, -Manhattan) ·        He is looking for more , wants to be a real writer not a fraud, wants to live in a better city, have a better life
Messages and Values and relevance?	·        Love, romance – woody’s signature spring-autumn romance(telegraph) ·        Everyday life in this city ·        Beauty the city and its life; in simplicity – the deeper look into things we usually overlook ·        History of the places showed – the character stuck in the past
Narrative Devices/Features and relevance?	·         Capturing the essence of the film/main character in the first sequence – Gil is a passionate writer in love with the city(Woody character) ·         Long opening sequence building up to the meeting of the characters ·         Getting to know the character before seeing them. Unbiased impression( not taking into account our previous feelings towards the actors) ·         Presenting the spectator with the main character’s view of the world(Gil’s beautiful romanticized Paris) ·         Combination of relevant and irrelevant shots to the whole movie( i.e. Moulin rouge, Paris in the rain, Paris in the day and night, the Eiffel tower)

New research focus

I have decide to switch my focus slightly from lack of real auteurs in Hollywood to the auteurs that are still around and are not appreciated enough. I have chosen Woody Allen as the auteur to focus on as he has been making films for a long time so there is a lot of material to study. Also the fact that he has not stopped making movies his own way after all these years, or changed himself in any way for fame shows his passion for films. The focus film I will discuss is To Rome With Love (2012) which was written and directed by Allen. This is proof that he still aims to make great movies in his unique style today without compromising . My two other films I will research are Manhattan (1979) as this is a romantic film too but quite early in his career, and Midnight in Paris(2011) as it is a modern romantic film written  by Allen. It has been compared to To Rome With Love as it follows a young couple in  a beautiful romantic city and has tones of neorealism too.

Context Area - Auteur

My chosen Context area is Auteurs. I chose this because I have always been interested by the people behind the scenes who direct the crew and the cast as I myself am interested in doing this in the future. I believe a movie is not only dependant on the budget or the talent of the cast but also on the dedication and the vision of the director behind. A true auteur should be able to reflect himself and his ideas in all of his work and that is what I want to look into; the people in the industry who are still able to do that.

Research update

My research topic is auteurs, specifically directors as their are the men behind the scene responsible for all the elements of the film coming together: cast, crew and their equipment and the script. The directors are responsible for taking the words off the paper and using all the people involved on set to create the best product for the audience. That is why I'm interested to research whether there are any auteurs left, any directors who still have passion for film and believe that a film should be made for the sake of art and entertainment not for the money.

My focus film is Café Society. This is a newly released film with pretty high profile actors by a very famous director Woody Allen that shows that a movie can be both good and of good taste. Although Woody Allen has been in the business for a long time he has not once given in to the 'blockbuster' conventions and continued to make the movies that he thought had a good story and were good quality. Café society has high profile but talented actors, taking roles suited for them, involved in an original romantic story. The use of real people and simple but amazing events is enough to get good ratings. Additionally, as always the film was first released at Cannes Film Festival followed by the cinematic release. This movie shows Woody Allen is a true auteur as he is still fighting the conventions in 2016.
  
Different online articles regularly discuss weather there are any auteurs left, or any people in Hollywood who don't just want to make films for money. This year's most cinematic releases could possibly support the idea that there is no more passion  and originality in Hollywood but at the same time we cannot ignore some of the best modern auteurs who still release films occasionally.
This can possibly explain why it's sop hard to find their movies even though we are reminded they exist every few years; they are struggling to survive in competition with the major studios who don't take kindly to their extravagant and risky ideas. Directors like Tim Burton would need a pretty big budget to be able to bring to life the weird yet magical stories he has , so this means he and other great auteurs have to rely on the faith and generosity of the studios in order to get their projects in motion.

The last of the auteurs?

http://www.cheatsheet.com/entertainment/7-modern-directors-and-their-distinctive-visual-styles.html/?a=viewall

Many have realised there is a lack of good movies coming out in the past years and they have blamed it on the lack of talent and skill in Hollywood, but here is a list of modern directors who have proved plenty of talent and passion.

Even though their movies are not at the top of every ShowTime list in the cinemas, these are some of the few modern auteurs that still make films with their unique style and strive to reflect themselves and the themes and ideas in their work.They are recognized by critics and have many dedicated fans but still get ignored by the big producers and pushed aside.
They might the last of the true auteurs of our time if we let them disappear or they might inspire the next generation of film makers to follow in their footsteps. It all depends on whether the big producers realise what a good product is and start making it.

Rationale (June)

 

The title that I have chosen for my project blog is ‘Film for film’s sake’ as my research will be about auteurs and their disappearance from Hollywood. My focus would be directors as they can choose if the movie will truly reflect them or they will create whatever the producers demand of them in order to make the most profit.

My focus film will be Last Action Hero as many critics have said that the premise of the film was very interesting and should have been a success but due to the involvement of the wrong people with the wrong intensions it has been called the biggest flop in cinema history. Interviews form the people involved in all the stages of the production have agreed that the involvement of the studio and their obsession with the idea that a big and loud will make them rich.

Similarly I have chosen John Carter and Aloha as support films as they have not been received very well even though their plot was good to begin with.

John Carter was based on a comic series which means that there was plenty of material to work with to get the best characterisation. Unfortunately they let the fans down which created a chain reaction of unsatisfied spectators.

Aloha is another original film which had a good starting plot, but it upset the audience as the casting was based on star power. This resulted in controversy as a partially Chinese character was played by a white American causing it to flop.

These films show that more and more everyday producers, directors and actor make the wrong decisions in order to maximise profit and sometimes this backfires costing them a lot of money and bad representation.

Primary Research:

As evidence I would use scenes such as the main fight scenes in Last Action Hero full of unnecessary ‘bad-ass’ dialogue, explosions and special effects , all to attract a male audience by creating excitement . Instead these scenes are hard to follow and not very interesting to watch.

For John Carter the scene I chose was the one where we first get introduced to the protagonist as it can be argues that the characterisation of the main character is unsatisfactory and not up to the expectations of the fans. 

Similarly for Aloha the scene I chose was the introductory scene for the character of Captain Allison Ng as she has been the reason for the whitewashing controversy as she was portrayed by Emma Stone.

Secondary research:

Many magazines such as Empire magazine or Forbes have mentioned these films alongside comments that they could have been great if they were not compromised by the greed of the makers. Additionally, many websites have questioned the intensions of these producers the same way and wonder whether they care about the product anymore, or just the money.

Additionally I will look into interviews directly from the directors on their own work and the responses from other critics as well as other director expressing their opinions on the intentions of the makers.