Cinema, film! Quite an obsession for (m)any! Well, indeed it IS a unique art. Look at writing, for instance. You may write a poem, a short story, a novel, an essay or even a play. The process of creation germinates, grows, gains in width and depth in/of the unique mind of the author and the page/the computer/mobile screen. If (s)he so wishes, the only light the text might see is the one that filters through the windows of the author's house.
That is not the case with the making of a film though. By definition, film making is a composite, a syncretic art. Forget the absolutely essential spectator who may/not watch it, a film from its very nascent stage is of the people and by the people.
Okay, let us look at the process in some detail. To begin with, there has to be an author whose story-line may be adapted to the camera vision by the script writer who, incidentally, need not be the dialogue writer.
The director whose 'vision' gives a film its 'local habitation', et al (to quote Shakespeare on the artistic/poetic creation), may be, with the film making from the writerly stage onwards, or may join in once the script is roughly ready. Of course, we know of very many author-directors (not to forget the contribution of the 'auteur' visionaries), too.
Then enters the financier, the producer who has to have faith in the seed that he can water with monies that could be ill-gotten, though that issue may not directly concern the aesthetics, which does get tarnished as the Bollywood n gangsters connect did prove.
Enter the higher level technicians, artists in their own right. Yes, I am talking of the director of the photography/the cinematographer, the special effects creator, and the editor. Next in the line are directorial assistants, the sound recordists, the costume designers, the hair stylists, the make-up artists, a hierarchy, in brief, wherein the spot dada, too, is important, not to forget the most exploited 'extras'.
When it comes to the Bollywood films, the dance director matters, too, just like the fight master and the stuntsmen. How can anyone forget the great lyricists, the superb music directors, and the divine singers?
Would you agree with me that actors may give a face to the film, yet their contribution to the entire process would be tops five per cent? It is hence that I feel sad when a film review is reduced to a rough storyline coupled with sundry comments on actors, because every film shot has its own grammar, each frame its unique syntax, and every montage its unique poetry!
Pratima@ Now with the AI and its 'creativity', the composite, syncretic art of film making, too, may get reductive. That concept, however, would require another blog to explore it in some detail.
Quote of the day: "For me, filmmaking combines everything. That’s the reason I’ve made cinema my life’s work. In films, painting and literature, theatre and music come together. But a film is still a film," asserts Akira Kurosawa, the film-makers' film-maker!
Word of the day: Composite 'Composite' refers to something made up of various distinct parts or elements. Like 'syncretic', it, too, involves a process of merging and blending.