Impact Of The Studio System On Filmmaking

Impact Of The Studio System On Filmmaking Examine the extent to which the Hollywood studio system nurtured or inhibited the artistry of film makers. This essay will be analysing to what extent the studio system has helped or possibly hindered the artistic nature and idea of filmmakers. The studio system can be defined under the idea that the studio owns and controls all aspects of the film creation. The largest and most prominent studios at this time were Warner Brothers, Paramount and MGM, they had final say over all decisions to do with the film (Filmsite, 2010). The Studio system was at its most prominent in the 1950s after having dominated the market from the 1920s to the 1940s, they made the final decision on all aspects of the film, and choose who they wanted to direct the film; this director would be given clear guidelines and rules to follow when creating the film. During the 1950s there started to emerge in Europe a belief that film should be more than just a story on the screen and that it was in fact an art form. This idea of the director taking control over the film to produce their own version, to show how they felt about the film carries into the theory of authorship. Authorship is when a creator of something puts their own stamp on what they are producing, from telling the story in a different way to shooting the film in a different style. The idea of authorship is seen in many texts over the centuries like Shakespeares Hamlet, where Hamlet speaks to the audience and in Jane Eyre when the main character addresss the reader in the first person. This idea is related to filmmakers because a film adopts the idea of literacy theory. During the 1950s a group of film critics in France created a magazine called Cahiers Du Cinema, to celebrate the film maker within the system, and to champion the cause of authorship. (Versobooks, 2009) From this the idea of Auteurism was born, whereby the director was given the control of the film making process to create their vision for the film. This theory is born out of the idea that film is art, and not just about making money, as was the conception to be the goal of the studio system during this time. The resulting flow of privately created artistic films that were created in Europe in this period, was known under the title of The French New Wave. This gained more momentum due to the magazine set up by Banzin, Chabrol, Truffaut, Rohmer and Godard, due to the growing idea of film as art through the theory of Autuerism. (Suite101, 2008) The French new wave was about legitimising cinemas as an art form, they believed that the idea of authorship was about the notion of a creative person, you are responsible for what you create and it will show in your art. They wanted to make films that were different from what most studios allowed. Most studios just made films that were based on novels and stories. A medium in which and by which an artist can express his thoughts, be they abstract or whatever, or in which he can communicate his obsessions as accurately as he can today in essay or novel (Unattributed B, 2010: 1) The French new wave believed that the director should be seen as a chief source of creativity, they believed that the idea the director comes up with has a huge impact on the film. It could be argued, that the Hollywood studio system has always tried to nurture the artistry of film makers, because even though the idea of film makers being seen as the director emerged slowly, studios did begin to see that directors has specialities in certain genres, and allowed them to build on that genre. John Ford was best known for his westerns, and Alfred Hitchcock was best known for his horror and suspense stories, this idea grew and allowed directors to grow in their own right. After the idea of the French new wave hit American it brought thought to studios, and they began to consider whether or not film should be seen as an art form. T.W. Griffiths film Birth of a Nation, was one of the earliest films that made studios question film as an art. His film brought the beginning to the golden age of Hollywood cinema, it shows that filmmakers tend to use film to make a point about what is going on at the time. Like Griffith many cinematic historians have examined stories from the past to suggest lessons concerning modern day controversies. (Toplin, R B, 1940: 18) The ideas that the Hollywood studios allowed the growth of creativity of film makers, is easy to see because, the auteur theory expresses the belief that a creative personality can surface through unpromising studio material, and in the end they make it their own. A film is seen as being unique because it does something only a film can do, it is an art form that can express a moment in time, and this idea is also called the holy moment. The idea of the auteur theory began to emerge from this, and it expressed a belief that some Hollywood directors could shape their material to something that meant something to them. It sought to establish individual creativity as the source of value in Hollywood ( Maltby, R, 2003: 46) the idea of the film maker being creative soon followed, and studios began to develop, with each studio having specialities like directors, MGM was good at creating musicals like singing in the rain, Warner brothers was good at making gangster film. One main person who believed that film makers like directors should be acknowledged more in a film is Alexandre Astruc, he was a film critic who was born in France and he argued that certain directors used the camera like a pen. The images themselves add nuance and develop the narrative as much as the dialog does (Unattributed C, 2010: 1) Using this idea and looking at American directors, it could be argued that as well as film makers being seen as authors with a creative process, there is an artistic value that results from their ideas and thoughts, allowing them to creatively express their imagination. The ideas of a film maker being creative, is all about whether they can create something amazing from not much that is given to them, and allowing themselves to work within the studio system. Sometimes auteurism is identified within specific genres and is linked to specialisation; each director has reoccurring elements that is found in all films they make. Alfred Hitchcock is one of the directors who makes each of his films with similar elements, and whose name always comes up when talking about auteur theory. His films are suspense films that keep audiences on their seats. Hitchcocks success didnt come from the type of genre the film was in. The skill which he exhibited in the filmmaking i.e. his treatment of the subject in terms of the shots he uses and how he combines them (Unattributed D, 2010: 1) However on the other hand it could also be argued that the Hollywood studio inhibited the artistry of film makers because, most film makers really only do what studios tell them, most work they do has to be checked by someone higher. The whole idea that Hollywood wanted to produce product not art is common because, under the studios rule the director is mainly a person hired to do what they want, he just puts the camera in the right place. Singing in the rain is a prime example of the way Hollywood saw its actors, directors etc, they were just hired. The ideas of auteur theory being a celebration of a directors freedom cant be understood by everyone because, it isnt just one person that works on a film it is a variety of people. More than one person will work on a film, so what makes the director more worthy of praise than, say, the scriptwriter or the camera operators? (Unattributed A, 2007: 1) Whether a film maker is creative or not in their film making process, may not even matter due to the fact that everyone sees things differently, what the person feels is not always what the audience sees. Due to the fact that films are made by studios, and the director isnt always the dominant one, most try to go independent but lose because, equipment used to make and produce films was expensive and not widely available. The idea of the independent American auteur is rare however, they do exist and they try to create a film that is away from the control of the studio system. Independent filmmaking consists of low-budget projects made by (mostly) young filmmakers with a strong personal vision away from the influence and pressures of the few major conglomerates that control tightly the American film industry (Daisies, G, 2010: 1) Independent film makers do work for studios as directors/ writers, and even actors for hire, just to make money to fund their project. Orson Welles is one of the film makers who pushed away from the studio system to make something he wanted. Welles embodies the concept of the tragic artist, he does everything an ideal film maker should do, he acts, writes, to raise money, but making his films he becomes a suffering artists. He wrote and starred in Citizen Kane which was about an investigation into the life of newspaper tycoon Charles Foster Kane. Orson Welles did make many films after Citizen Kane, but his success in making independent films was very expensive and so he didnt make many big budget films, after twenty years in the studio he made another independent film called chimes at midnight. The fullest, most completely realized expression of everything [Welles] had been working toward since Citizen Kane. (Unattributed E, 2010: 1) No matter the financial problems at the end, Orson Welles remains the ideal film maker who fought against the studio systems control. In conclusion it is hard to try to discover whether or not the Hollywood studio system nurtured or inhibited the artistry of film makers, no matter how much the directors/film makers are seen as creative, most of them all are contracted by the studios. Followers of the French New Wave movement argue that, the studio system does hinder a director, as they think that films should be art and should be a representation of the directors views, and emotion towards the script. According to (Alfred Hitchcock: Auteur?, 2010) the idea behind the auteur director are done in terms of personal vision, the recurring themes, even a defined view of the world, and a degree of control over production, In auteur films, it is the director who controls the artistic statement, takes credit for the film and is responsible for attracting the audience. (Unattributed F, 2010: 1) Alfred Hitchcock was a major example of seeing a director as a auteur, as his films follow the necessary needs taking up by the French new wave, they have reoccurring themes which are done by a personal vision of his and will even shock audiences. So looking at American directors it is common to see that each one has a creative way to express their imagination. Studios throughout the 50s and onwards always had some control over the films production, when a director is hired and given a clear set of rules and guidelines to follow, and is not given full control of all aspects of the film, (such as stars of the film, setting or style) then they cannot possibly make their mark on the film. This may well be the case that the Studio system does hinder a director, and stop him from being an artist, but maybe this is not what the public want from films. This can be seen in the current situation we have where, although previously widely thought to be a hindrance to directors and their artistry, the studio system period is now being heralded in the media and by the public as the golden age of cinema. The idea of authorship takes hold in the film industry after the 1950s when film was seen as art not entertainment, however Hollywood had been in an era of a golden age, there reign caused many problem and in 1948 the US department of justice sued the ma jor studios for anti competitive practices. No longer could the film industry control (or monopolize) all aspects of film production, distribution and exhibition (Kliedie, 2007: 1) It seems that regardless of whether or not the studio system affects the artistry of filmmakers, it is now becoming more popular again, and some of the films from this period that are used to stereotype the studio system, are being heralded as classic films. So it would seem that despite films not being creative art and having complete authorship from the director, the mass public does not seem to mind watching studio system type films.

Internet Browser Essay

Despite the fact that Internet Explorer 5. 5 is one of the most popular in companies, I’d like to recommend another one – Maxthon Browser 2. 0, because it is much more convenient for office working. Maxthon Internet Browser 2. 0 is a powerful tabbed browser nowadays. Its main advantage is a highly customizable interface. Although Maxthon Browser is based on the engine of Internet Explorer, it has many additional efficient features. What works in Internet Explorer works as well in Maxthon Browser and even better and faster. (Maxthon). Maxthon Browser includes many new features involving full customization of layout, new clean interface, multi-tab workspace, better security and improved rss/podcast reader. Until nowadays a big inconvenient was: bookmarklet, toolbar and 3rd party plugins. Maxthon 2. 0 supports all of the functions compared with Internet Explorer, Opera, etc. Additionally Maxthon has few exclusive screenshots below. Nevertheless the most interesting feature of new Maxthon is its possibility to create an account and to store all necessary information and settings online. The function is simply used just by logging in. Although Opera, Internet Explorer and FireFox are more sophisticated and have got more market share, Maxthon is swiftly gaining popularity. (Maxthon) Today is the era of Internet and application functionality is able to expand beyond the operating system into the desktops and the web. Personalization and delivery is very important and Maxthon Browser with its organic growth is a serious representative of such trend. In several years Maxthon will become a key player in the Internet market, because it has serious investors such as Morten Lund, CRV, and WI Harper, growing community and actually beautiful product. I recommend Maxthon, because it differs from other browsers and makes working process with Internet easier as it includes the visible gestures and customizable Tab handling. But the most useful is if the browser is closed accidentally with ten tabs open, the next time it is opened, they are still there. (Maxthon). References â€Å"Maxthon: the Browser that Rocks†. (2006, February 28) Retried September, from http://www. techcrunch. com.

Lance Armstrong

For a period of 1 2 years, Lance Armstrong lied about doping to the entire world. In the process he selfishly ruined multiple live. A man who would ruin lives and Ile Just to ride a bike Is truly selfish. Because the drugs that Lance Armstrong used and lied about can enhance his performance, and are banned, he should get his medals taken away. Lance Armstrong has been racing since he was 19 years old and has gone to win 7 tour de France titles. He founded the Livestrong charity which helps out cancer patients. Lance Armstrong was accused of doping during all of his races.He sued those who accused him of doping and ruined their reputations and even lives In the process. He later on confessed to his doping after appearing on the Oprah Winfrey show. He also admitted that he has been lying about it for 12 years. Because Armstrong cheated, he does not deserve his medals. In the article by Ashling O'Conner â€Å"I'm the fall guy: Armstrong puts a historical spin on his cheating† Arm strong tries to Justify his actions. It is un-sportsmen like to try to justify cheating and lying the way he did. He obviously has no respect for the sport and others.In nother article titled â€Å"Lance Armstrong tried to donate around $250,000 to USADA† Brent Schrotenboer mentions Armstrong's attempt at a bribe. Someone who tries to bribe like that has something to hide. Armstrong knows what he did was wrong and is willing to do anything to cover it up. Even if it means ruining lives in the process. Armstrong ruined so many people's lives during all of this. In the article â€Å"admission' Just another Lance ploy† Greg couch explains how Armstrong ruined people's lives. Armstrong demonstrated how selfish he is by suing all those Innocent people for all that they have.He Is selfish and should have his medals taken away from him as a token for the lives he has ruined. In another article by Liz Clarke â€Å"Armstrong confesses to doping† it gives examples of Arms trong threatening people if they told about his doping. This is just more evidence the Armstrong is generally not a good person. It does not matter If he had to dope In order to win. If he needs performance enhancers to win a race, then he shouldn't be racing at all. Just because everybody Is doping doesn't make It okay. It should make him feel better knowing that he can beat a bunch of people that need drugs to do better.And the drugs that Armstrong used can badly harm your body after a while. Lance Armstrong admitted to doping and using performance enhancing drugs. Because he did not win any of his races in his career by his own abilities, he should have his medals and titles taken away from him. So what everybody Is doping. So what he wouldnt win If he dldnt. Because he thinks that he needs to dope In order to win a race, and he does, his medals should be taken away from him and given to the next person who did not test positive for banned drugs. Lance Armstrong By Agentbilly3 Fo r a period of 12 years, Lance Armstrong lied about doping to the entire world.In the process he selfishly ruined multiple live. A man who would ruin lives and lie Just to ride a bike is truly selfish. Because the drugs that Lance Armstrong used and lied those who accused him of doping and ruined their reputations and even lives in the Armstrong tries to Justify his actions. It is un-sportsmen like to try to Justify cheating Brent Schrotenboer mentions Armstrongs attempt at a bribe. Someone who tries to â€Å"admission' Just another Lance ploy' Greg couch explains how Armstrong ruined people's lives. Armstrong demonstrated how selfish he is by suing all those innocent eople for all that they have.He is selfish and should have his medals taken away they told about his doping. This is Just more evidence the Armstrong is generally not It does not matter if he had to dope in order to win. If he needs performance enhancers to win a race, then he shouldn't be racing at all. Just because e verybody is doping doesn't make it okay. It should make him feel better knowing that he can beat have his medals and titles taken away from him. So what everybody is doping. So what he wouldn't win if he didn't.

The United States And The Federal System - 1360 Words

The United States is one of the few countries that govern through the federal system. Federalism was created to organize a form of government where multiple levels of government have authority. It was meant to decentralize and divide powers and responsibilities to prevent a tyranny from ever taking over. Although the United States adopted federalism as their system of government, the balance of power has been broken, drastically shifting it to the central government. Now, it is no question that the federal government held supreme power over the states and in the past few decades as well. People argue that it is more important to have a strong federal government because they have the ability to enact the policies that strongly affect the†¦show more content†¦Doing so also allows the federal government to concentrate its powers on different matters that needs to be addressed such as free college education and healthcare. In 1789, twelve constitutional amendments were proposed to the First Congress. Two years later, ten amendments were ratified. These 10 amendments were later known as the Bill of Rights, thus marking the birth of Federalism. The Federal System restrained the national government from obstructing personal freedom. The Constitution listed a broad range of powers of the federal government to exercise. The Tenth Amendment, which guaranteed what s left of the state s power, stated The powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Despite the amendment showing clear examples of federalism, it did little to nothing to limit federal powers. This amendment, however, prevented the national government from completely trampling the states. It also made it clear that states had their own power, separately in their own sphere-not an implication that state power reign supreme over the Federal government. In early 1800 s, the power of the states was tested as it battled the national government in the case of McCulloch v. Maryland. The state of Maryland, claiming that the Congress was overstepping its bounds