Part 1: View a feature film made between 1940 - 1970 you have
not seen before (or will see later in this class) by a great
director. If you would like to see an American film, consider
seeing something directed by Frank Capra, George Cukor, John Ford,
George Stevens, Preston Sturges, Billy Wilder, or William Wyler. If
you would like to try a foreign film, consider Ingmar Bergman
(Swedish), Luis Buñuel (Spanish), Claude Chabrol (French), Federico
Fellini (Italian), Akira Kurosawa (Japanese), Lina Wertmuller
(German) or the British team known as “The Archers” made up of
Michael Powell and Emeric Pressburger. These are suggestions, but
not a comprehensive list of possibilities. For a much more
extensive list, you might want to visit
http://www.filmsite.org/directors.html. (Note that many directors
were active both before and after 1970. Make sure you see a
pre-1970 film, make sure it's a film you have not seen before, and
make sure it is a feature. Don't, for example, see Buñuel's UN
CHIEN ANDALOU, which is a short, not a feature.)
Comment on the specific film you saw. Pay particular attention
to the camerawork (cinematography) the editing (montage) and the
sound (this can include the music). What did you like, and what did
you dislike, about what you saw? Why do you like the things you
like, and why do you dislike the things you dislike? Is the film a
good film, or is it not? (Note: This is not the
same question as whether or not you liked it. It is entirely
possible to like a film that you are aware is not very good.) You
should comment on the film both as a representative of its genre
and as a film.
Part 2: Now that you have commented on the specific film you
viewed, see if you can draw some general conclusions about the work
of the director and one of the main actors or actresses. For
example let us say you watched the 2012 film Prometheus (no
this is a not a film you can watch for this paper). Did you
like Ridley Scott as a filmmaker? Did you like Michael Fassbender
in the roll of an emotionless android? Why, or why not? Be sure to
comment on the overall impression you had of the film, including
how you see it as an example of the its genre and time period.
Remember, this is not a research paper. I am interested in what you
have to say, not in what you can learn by reading up on the film or
the filmmaker.
Part 3: On a separate page, insert the heading "My Criteria for
Quality in Film." Under that heading, use your comments about this
film and its filmmaker as guidelines toward proposing five general
statements indicative of your personal taste in movies. These
statements should be numbered (1) through (4), and they should be
written as complete sentences or a short paragraph. It might be
useful to introduce each statement with such language as "Excellent
movies feature," or "A movie is more likely to be good if," or "A
characteristic of high-quality cinema is." (For example, if you
commented in the body of your essay that you liked the acting
because it was realistic and you liked the script because it had a
happy ending, you could propose these two statements as criteria
for quality: "(1) Excellent movies feature realistic acting. (2) A
movie is more likely to be good if it ends happily." Do not just
put something like "Good movies feature good acting." The point
here is for you to think about—and then explain—what such quality
words as good, excellent, and effective
actually mean. Be sure to save your "My Criteria" page to your hard
drive—you will be adding more items to this list and resubmitting
an expanded version of it with for the second paper later in this
course.