Commenting on the Critics with Simon Columb…
Hayley Dixon writes for The Telegraph…
“Greg Dyke said it is ‘ridiculous’ that schools are lagging behind in a world dominated by film and television. The BFI is launching a £26 million film education programme which aims to reach every child in schools across Britain in four years.
‘People at the BFI argue all the time, and I think they’re right: isn’t it weird that we learn Shakespeare but we don’t learn Hitchcock?’ Mr Dyke, the former director general of the BBC, told the Times Education Supplement.
‘It seems ridiculous to us that in a world where the moving image is the major means of communication, schools seem a long way behind.’“
Read the full article here.
Immediately the comparison to Shakespeare is going to create frustration in readers and theatre-goers, but I do believe that Mr Dyke is correct with this comparison.
Cinema is a medium that only dates back to the late 1800s – and even then, it has only really managed to become a worldwide, artistic property within the last 100 years. Theatre and literature obviously date back thousands of years and so such a comparison is difficult at best.
Crucially, the current world is alive with video – especially as children record on their phones daily. The value of such access to art and creativity, I believe, is lost on these children as they have no clear understanding of the artistry behind cinema and filmmaking.
It seems that the only experience children have of cinema is the latest blockbuster release. Too often people will discuss the merits of a film that obsessively pays tribute to a genre. The latest example is Oblivion whereby the Tom Cruise led film seems to borrow from so many science fiction movies, it is easy to lose count: The Matrix, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Planet of the Apes, Independence Day, Alien… the list goes on and on. To a film-savvy viewer, these “nods” to classic staples of the genre can be jarring and frustrating – especially as Oblivion doesn’t seem to offer anything new in comparison to these films. A teenager who hasn’t seen The Matrix (it is almost 15 years old now!) may watch Oblivion and assume full credit belongs to Cruise and Joseph Kosinski – could this ignorance ensure financial success and sequels?
Cinema – like English, Art, Theatre, Dance and Music – has a wealth of history that has led to the filmmakers of today. Without an appreciation and awareness of this history – in a strange paraphrasing of a philosophical statement – filmmaking is doomed to repeat itself (Oblivion is a testament to that!). Add to this how Hollywood are only too keen to establish a property to “sequelise”, and we have a situation whereby remakes and sequels will continue to become successful – as most cinema-goers will watch a remake and sequel satisfied. Indeed, through a lack of appreciation of the history of the medium, they’ve never seen anything like it before.
Trevor Hogg says
This is what William Goldenberg had to say when questioned about the impact Heat had on Christopher Nolan when he was making The Dark Knight:<br /><br /> “All great directors borrow from great directors. I know from a lot of directors if they’re going to make movie they’re going to look at every movie in the similar genre, take notes and ideas, and make them their own.”
Simon says
As viewers, we need to be aware of something that pushes the medium further (THE DARK KNIGHT, et al) and films that merely mangle films together for a quick buck (OBLIVION). We will get alot more films of that nature if the medium is not seen as an art form alongside theatre, literature and fine art.
Shane Dobbie says
There are far too many big name directors around( looking at you Abrams) whose films lack any kind of cinematic artistry. Abrams especially regurgitates things he's watched without any understanding of why they were good. His films are like third generation VHS pirate copies.Hollywood fodder has all but destroyed out abilities to read film. Who are the next generation going to try and emulate
obloodyhell says
While there is some merit to this…<br />1) Recall that the original Star Wars, which few complain about, had a huge influence from the Kurosawa film, "The Hidden Fortress". Telling a truly new story often requires something truly new to accomplish it, usually in new film technique. The 10 minute film canisters of Rope, for example, or the liquid-metal/morph effect of T2, or the "
Simon says
I think you have a good point. The TYPE of development from original ideas does seem a bit flat. A little bit like they've missed the point. I thought SUPER 8 was a very clear, obvious homage to the Amblin catalogue – and I think thats allowed. I think the type of by-the-numbers copying seen in OBLIVION is the problem.
Simon says
Thanks for the comment! You are right – art always influences art. Thats not a problem at all. I think it is the type of influlence whether it is a 'nod' or, in the most blunt possible way, a complete rip-off. MTV is a huge influence – absolutely but that doesn't mean we shouldn't challege ourselves to understand the complexities of an epic story. Paul Thomas Anderson doesn't