[Week 8] Some philosophical thoughts about stars (not necessary but interesting tho.)

Charles Chaplin's films are well-known from the silent film era until nowadays. Is Chaplin a modest genius or a crude and vulgar social menace? Everyone is holding different opinions but either way, the fact that everyone is making comments on his star persona means he made huge influence on the world. The distinction between Chaplin's persona and real personality; the relationship between the work he presents and the audience who buy it; the matching of audiences' interests in Chaplin film company's decision and the real facts of him as a celebrity are all worth exploring.

Amy quotes on the powerpoint that according to Charles Maland, the star system “provided a way for one company to differentiate its product from that of other companies” (198). Different company controls the representation of film, the style of their work, and the stars of their company. The needs of Chaplin's film is not simply expressing art feeling, but also fit what the public want to see in order to educate and control their reaction in certain way. People want to see a ideal character, the company will create one that fit people's expectation. As I always mention, because the media of film is so special and different than any other type of art form, the acting of actor itself cannot be defined as real or fake. The action of the actor is preplanned, but since it is still an action that take by a real human being, the value is solid and real. Moreover, since all the actings are coming from the specific person with their vivid personality. Maybe the cinematic persona is more or less showing their real personality?

Anyways, people who work in film factory are more like worker than artist. The command goal is concordant, company knows what the audience want to see, then be able to plan out a whole formula for the stars to live a ideal life for the public to view. People need some sort of guide, a simply story that everyone can understand to enjoy. The majority does not need to see the real truth of another person, specially a star to be influenced from them, to learn from them. Also, not a lot of people will have the time and curiosity to dig down the real truth behind the others. They will take the simple and perfect answer then go. Because the main thing for the film audience is to enjoy the film itself rather than get to know the truth and life of the star behind the story. However, the problem of this labeling character with actor that will appear is the great scandal or contrast of them two when the public find out the unpleasant truth. For Chaplin's scandal, how can the public take that? Should they hold the opinion of "art is art, the artist is the artist, they can be discussed separately", or "if your real personality is bad, no matter how good your acting is, your art is still bad"? What should people react to artist who commit crime, can't a person be both perfect in art area but shitty in personal life? If the audience's goal is to admire art and get the information from the artwork, is the real personality of the stars really matter for them? Why did golden age Hollywood has the need to create stars's fake personal life for the public to view if the only thing matter is the story itself?


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

[Week 9] The ending of the journey to silent cinema+ bonus my rap song

Image
Finally! The long but fast journey to the silent cinema era is going to end for this term. Even though my exploration to film will never end, but what I learn in this term is already enough to digest. We walked from pre cinema era, to the first screening of film, to the simple life recording footage film, to the pure cinema of attraction, to the first editing strategy of film, to all the development of narrative film and aesthetic value of all type of film... This short 9 weeks do include a lot of amazing and interesting and boring but still important(sorry) information of film and I loved it! What I found intrigues me the most is the fact that by seeing the growing up of cinema from such a close and careful way, all the little improvement and innovation in the first 40 years of cinema are all so clear to be noticed. I am the theory lover who rely on cool cinematic skills a lot when making film, thus it makes me become so sensitive to the cinematic skills in the old film when we watc...
Read more

[week 5] forum+reflection - what story attracts what type of spectator?

Image
Q: In the reading both Shelley Stamp and Richard Abel demonstrate the ways that spectatorship changes cinema and vice versa. How did series like Les Vampires and The Perils of Pauline challenge gender roles? How did they help establish narrative conventions and codes?  Unlike the beginning of the cinema which audiences and directors focus more on the "cinema of attraction" when they make films. With the better developing of technique and cinema language and expression. When directors like Louis J. Gasnier start to use cinema as a media to really tell a complicated story, the hook and suspension factors in the early narrative film become very important. First of all, what people want to see in “nickelodeon” must be something unique and interesting after more and more people figuring out how the media of film works. They will start aiming more intriguing screenplay rather than simple one shot films. As Ben Singer concludes in his article "manhattan nickelodeons...
Read more

[Week 7] Forum-Film Analysis

Image
Q: These films are both made during the silent film era but are almost 20 years apart and from very different cultural and historical contexts. How do these films use the tools of cinema specifically to tell their story? How do each of the films contribute to the development of narrative cinema? Made in Movie Heaven: The Best Match Cuts in History In week 8, both The Great Train Robbery (1903) film and  I was Born But...(1932) film are extremely attractive to me. Even though the time of publishing these two films has a 30 years interval, both of them used their own methods to developed and explored the expression of cinema language.  in  The Great Train Robbery (1903), the main powerful tool that is being used is professional acting, which is the simple and distinguishable action and interaction between people on screen. Even without on screen dialogue or flash clip with words on, the film allows audience to understand and digest the story plot effortl...
Read more