We can condense all the movements in the history of cinema into 2 very broad categories: Classic and Modern. In this post, we will be discussing the difference between Classic and modern film narratives.

The Narrative in Classic Hollywood Movies

In classical movies, the narrative is told in chronological order. There is also a cause-effect logic that leads the audience from one scene to the next.

The movie starts with introducing the characters, then one event leads to the other until the conflict arises. The characters work on overcoming this conflict until they reach a resolution at the end.

This type of storytelling is called the three act structure.

For example, let us look at the Titanic. Yes, classical movies don’t have to be black and white.

The movie starts with an old woman telling her story, and then we get introduced to the two main characters: Jack and Rose. We follow their story from the moment they get up to the boat until [Spoiler Alert] the sinking and Jack’s death.

Another main characteristic of classical narrative movies is that they are easy to understand and follow. That is because it is straightforward cinematic storytelling.

The main interest in classical movies is the story itself.

So, the core of a typical classical movie would revolve around characters that face a problem and work to solve it.

When someone asks you: “what was the movie about?” It will be very easy to answer the question if the movie followed the classic narrative.

This will not be the case if the movie was modern. You would be answering: “you would have to watch. I don’t want to spoil” or “there is actually no story per se”.

Let us discuss the narrative of modern movies to make sense of such answers.

The Narrative in Modern Movies

Modern cinema is a movement in cinema that tries to be as far as possible from classical films. (Here modern cinema is a type of film and it does NOT mean new). That is why it is very easy to differentiate between classic and modern film narratives.

Modern cinematic narratives are stories told in a somehow complicated way and out of chronological order.

Such film narratives neglect the three-act structure.

They do not necessarily end with a resolution, and can have open endings instead.

For example, look at Tarantino movies. (Tarantino movies are good examples here although they are post-modern).

The way Pulp Fiction tells a story is very complicated because the scenes are arranged out of chronology.

In such narratives, the movies tend to be harder to understand and they require more attention and close interpretation to be understood.

See also an example of the narrative of Citizen Kane.

Movies that belong to modern cinema (or art-house cinema) are usually character-driven. In contrast to classic Hollywood movies that are story-driven.

This means that the narrative of modern movies focuses more on the characters and their psychological state or dilemma.

So if you want to watch a philosophical movie or a film about existential crisis, look for modern film.

Finally, to sum it up:

The difference between classical Hollywood and modern film narrative:

The post Classic vs Modern film narratives appeared first on AV FilmSchool.

Each genre has specific ingredients (characters, setting, narrative…)

And movies that belong to a certain genre all share the same recipe or genre formula.

Directors play around with these ingredients and recipes to develop the genre or even create a new one.

In the coming posts of this Film Genre series, we will be identifying the ingredients and formulas of the most popular genres.

But for now, let’s try to be general…

What is a Movie Genre?

A movie genre is a type or category.

And movies that belong to the same genre family share similar characteristics.

Meaning, genre movies would have familiar characters and similar settings. The narrative would also be familiar and the ending of the movie is most of the time predictable.

For example, all fairy tail movies share the same genre ingredients:

Familiar characters: Or what we call “stock characters”. In this case, these are the princess, the prince, the evil queen…

Similar setting: Usually is land far away…

Familiar narrative and ending: typically, fairy tails are stories about a protagonist (usually the princess) who has a problem because of the antagonist (evil queen). Along the way the princess falls in love with prince charming who helps and saves her where they live happily ever after in the end.

So, how to identify the genre of a movie?

There are hundreds of genres. We can classify movies according to many variables:

Production value: Indi, Blockbuster…
Artistic value: commercial, art-house…
script: fiction, documentary

Concerning fiction movies, there are mainly 3 ways to identify the genre:

1- Theme: If the theme of the movies revolves around crime, then it’s a crime or gangster genre. If it’s funny hen it’s a comedy…

2- Presentation: music and dance? It’s a musical… Low key light and black&white? It’s a film noir

3- Plot Pattern: the movie starts with a crime and ends with solving the crime? You knew it… Its a detective genre

Okay, we identified the genre. But you may be asking now… What is the purpose of film genres in the first place? And why are they so important?

You are right to ask.

Actually, film theorists debated the importance of the movie genre a long time ago.

What are film genres used for?

To help the audience choose a movie.

Because genre films share many similar characteristics, the audience may prefer movies belonging to a certain genre more than the others. This helps you choose what movie you want to watch.

To have expectations.

We all expect to see epic war fights in a war movie or to laugh in a comedy. So in a way genres are a promise from the filmmakers to deliver certain scenes or emotions to their audience.

To predict.

We said before that genre movies share a predictable resolution. The viewers can predict that the main characters will end up together in a romantic comedy for example. This creates anticipation when watching the movie. You would be thinking: I know they will end up together… But how would they manage to fix this problem that pulled them apart?

To track market tendencies.

Film producers and industry analysts use these genres to track what is popular at the time so they can make more commercially successful movies with the same formula.

To interpret.

Movie critics use genres to analyze and interpret movies. they track the development of the genre and criticize the predictability.

To theorize.

Film scholars and theorists look at genres with a sociological and cultural lens. They consider popular genres to mirror the thoughts and ideologies of the culture. This point of course needs to be elaborated. In the final post of this Film Genre series, we will be discussing this genre theory in detail.

In the coming posts:

This is the first of a series of posts where we’ll be discussing different movie genres, their ingredients, formula, and reviewing movies of TV shows belonging to the genre.

The post What is a Movie Genre (and why are genres used) appeared first on AV FilmSchool.

Horror movies have been popular since the early beginnings of movie production.

The genre started to develop with Georges Méliès. The director made a silent film called The House of the Devil in 1896. It is the first horror movie ever made.

What is the horror film genre?

I know its self explanatory… But I’ll say it anyway… Horror movies are movies intended to scare who is watching them :O

The ingredients of the horror genre:

The villain

Can be a monster, alien, ghost, human…

The hero

This is usually the protagonist who is pursued by the villain.

The hero is naturally in immediate life-threatening danger because of the villain.

The First Victim

The character that dies first. The death of this character is the event that shows the evil and cruelty of the villain.

Music

A main ingredient in the horror genre.

Music is used to build tension, suspense, and to set up an unsettling mood.

Lighting

Darkness is horror’s best friend.

Dim light, low exposure, and high contrast lighting are essential ingredients of the horror genre.

Camera Movement/ Angles

Horror movies are usually filmed with hand-held camera.

Mainly, POV (point of view). The camera usually moves and follows the characters to give a panic feeling.

Peeking shots are also used by having an object in the foreground. This gives a creepy feeling that the characters are always being watched.

Horror movies also depend heavily on close up shots. These kinds of shots help the audience feel with the character. But most importantly, close-ups don’t give much information. This increases the element of scare and tension.

For example, if the character is alone in the woods.. and we are only seeing her in close up, the audience won’t know if the “monster” is near or not. This makes the audience on their toes the entire scene.

Setting

The climax of most horror movies take place at night or in a low-light interior place.

Violence

Gory violence is a main component of horror.

Sex

Almost all horror films include graphic sex scenes. I don’t have an explanation… but sex seems to go well with the genre.

The formula of the narrative of a horror film would be like this:

Characters in their ordinary life.. everything is going normal until the villain enters the scene and turns things upside down. All the main characters are in immediate danger.. the protagonist manages to survive till the climax. In the climax, the final fight begins. Sometimes it can be the final escape. The movie ends with the protagonist free. The villain may dead.

In some cases evil wins… the villain defeats the characters. In other words, wait for the sequel.

Next, I want to discuss a horror film. The first thing that comes to mind is a movie for the master of horror: Alfred Hitchcock.

Yet, I decided to talk about a more “recent” movie that deserves to be discussed because it is somehow different from other movies in the genre.

Next: Review of The Silence of the Lambs

The post The Ingredients of the Horror Film Genre appeared first on AV FilmSchool.

If you are reading this post, then We are sure you have already seen some of these movies and you would be familiar with many of the directors.

We recommend that you add the ones that you haven’t watched yet to your watch list.

Many titles and directors on this list will pop up in conversations about cinema or in film classes.

We carefully created this must-watch movie list to be as diverse as possible. We included old and new movies from different genres by international directors.

In every entry we will talk about:

• Why are these directors important
• What is the director’s style
• The most important movie in the director’s filmography
• Why you should watch this movie

Note: movies are listed in random chronology and not according to their importance.

1. The Godfather (Dir. Francis Ford Coppola, 1972)

Francis Ford Coppola is a major film figure especially in Hollywood in the 1960s and 1970s. He is one of the greatest American directors.

The director is best known and appreciated for directing The Godfather:

A trilogy that defined the gangster genre and mafia movies.

The Godfather is an essential film for any cinema lover to watch.

You most probably have already watched it, but a list of must-watch movies could not be complete without The Godfather.

The Godfather is a very good example of how cinematography (lighting and framing) can help in telling the story and establishing the style of a movie.

The director (and of course cinematographer Gordon Willis) used dark lighting to create a dark, uncomfortable, and sinister feel.

Concerning framing, the characters were positioned within the space of the frame to communicate where the characters stand in particular situations.

Coppola used this framing technique in a natural way so that the audience would not feel that the frames are artificial.

2. Citizen Kane (Dir. Orson Welles, 1941)

Orson Welles (1915-1985) would be the first director to come to mind when creating a list of directors and movies that film students should watch.

He changed the way movies were shot at his time.

Welles is considered one of the greatest and most influential directors of all time.

Of course, we can debate and elaborate on this statement, but this is not the place for our personal preferences.

Anyway, Welles is an American director, screenplay writer, producer, and actor. He is an excellent introduction to classic Hollywood cinema.

Orson Welles is most known for his innovative narrative techniques and use of dramatic lighting,

His greatest accomplishment is of-course, Citizen Kane:

Orson Welles co-wrote, directed, produced, and starred in this movie.

Many critics consider Citizen Kane as the greatest movie ever made. (We say its great.. but the greatest?! debatable)

Before this movie, movies were shot using static camera (fixed shots). Citizen Kane changed this perception and many directors started using moving shots and high and low camera angles.

Its influence is still present in today’s cinema.

3. Seven Samurai (Dir. Akira Kurosawa, 1954)

The first Japanese director to have international acclaim and success among both film critics and the audience.

Akira Kurosawa (1910-1998) is among the most important director in the history of cinema.

His filming style is a trademark. Kurosawa often bridges Japanese and Western themes in his movies.

That’s why the international audience relates to his movies.

If film students wanted to get introduced to the director’s work, we recommend starting with Seven Samurai.

This Japanese movie by the great Kurosawa is one of the first action movies. It has some action sequences that we still consider great even in comparison to recent movies.

Seven Samurai laid down the fundamental structure of the action film genre.

On top of that, it is a highly entertaining movie that almost anyone can enjoy.

4. Breathless (Dir. Jean-Luc Godard, 1960)

Jean-Luc Godard started as a film critic in the French film magazine Cahiers du Cinema. He used to criticize the French mainstream cinema.

Later, Godard and some of his fellow cretics started directing movies of their own rather than just complaining.

Those filmmakers expressed their philosophies about life and art. By that, they changed cinema as people knew it at their time.

Godard is one of the most influential French directors. He is a pioneer in the French New Wave film movement in the 1960s.

Experimenting with: film narrative + continuity +camera angles + movements = Godard

To better understand Godard’s experimental directing techniques, and to have an idea about the movies of the French New Wave, look no further than the movie: Breathless.

Not a movie that can be enjoyed by all people, but it is undoubtedly a must-watch for people who appreciate the art of film.

If you are a film student or a film lover, then you are expected to have seen Godard’s Breathless.

Breathless is a very well crafted film. It gives a unique experience of watching movies.

Godard broke the “rules” of cinema to make a statement about the innovation and renovation of the film industry.

Finally, this movie is the go-to film to give examples of jump cuts: an editing technique that Godard was one of the first to use in cinema.

5. Rope (Dir. Alfred Hitchcock, 1948)

No list of influential directors and must-watch movies can be complete without a movie by Alfred Hitchcock: the founder of the modern horror genre.

Alfred Hitchcock (1899-1980) is an English director and screenplay writer. He is the most studied director in the history of cinema.

Many books and retrospectives researched his persona and directing style.

Hitchcock has a unique directing style.

Basically, his camera movements feel as if it is the point of view of a person who is looking at the characters in the movie.

Let’s get technical: We call his camera work voyeurism or the gaze.

From the French word voyeur which means looking at or peeking. We now refer to this type of camera movement as the Hitchcockian style.

Many critics refer to Hitchcock as the master of suspense.

When you hear Hitchcock, you would think of his cameo appearances in almost all his movies.

Of course, Psycho is the most known movie. Read Psycho – A Timeless Classic

But film students should be familiar with Rope as well.

Rope is Hitchcock’s first colored movie. And like most of his movies, Rope belongs to the psychological crime thriller genre.

Film students must watch this movie because it is distinct in Hitchcock’s filmography.

The movie takes place in real-time. Meaning that the events of the movie don’t jump in time.

Rope was also filmed as a one long shot.

It was actually shot in 10 takes that were designed to look like a single shot with editing techniques.

6. Pulp Fiction (Dir. Quentin Tarantino, 1994)

Quentin Tarantino is one of the most influential, maybe the most influential, directors of our age.

The American director, screenwriter, and producer is an icon of post-modern cinema.

Tarantino is most known for using graphic violence and for his unpredictable scripts, and for the long dialogue scenes.

All Tarantino movies include references and homages to other movies.

We can recommend many great movies by Tarantino… Reservoir Dogs, Kill Bill, Natural Born Killers, Django Unchained… Just to name a few.

Yet, for this list it was natural to choose Pulp Fiction:

Pulp Fiction is Tarantino’s masterpiece.

The movie got great critical praise. A large number of the audience also love this film.

When talking about post-modern cinema, Pulp Fiction would be the first refrence to come to mind.

Tarantino used non-linear storytelling. That is changing the chronological order of events.

Although the audience needed to figure out the order of events, the movie remained (somehow) easy to understand and very entertaining.

It combined gory violence with comedy and features great dialogue and acting.

Obviously, Pulp fiction was not the first movie to use these techniques, but it can be considered the most popular one of its time (and probably till now).

7. 8 ½ (Dir. Federico Fellini, 1963)

The most celebrated Italian director and one of the most important film figures of all time.

Frederico Fellini (1920-1993) is an Italian film director and screenplay writer. He is a major influence of the Italian neorealism film movement.

Fellini is most famous for his directing style that blends fantasy and dream like sequences with normal and real-life situations.

His movies require a selected taste in arthouse cinema in order to be fully appreciated and understood the way they are intended to be.

Among his well known movies: Roma, La Dolce Vita, and La Strada.

Those are all very good movies. But for a list of movies that film students (and film lovers in general) should watch, we couldn’t but have 8 1/2 among the selected movies.

This masterpiece is considered a celebration of cinema.

The movie is about a director making a movie, and the title refers to the number of films the director has made until that point.

Simply, 8 ½ is the best film on the subject of filmmaking.

It is a must-watch for anyone interested in making a professional career in movies.

Add to that, 8 1/2 is a great introductory to Italian cinema, especially Italian neorealism.

8. Taste of Cherry (Dir. Abbas Kiarostami, 1997)

Kiarostami (1940-2016) is a main figure in the Iranian New Wave.

He is one of the masters of modern cinema.

The Iranian director gained big international praise from film critics, film scholars, and the audience.

Many of his fellow directors expressed their appreciation for his work and honored him. Among these directors: Jean-Luc Godard, Akira Kurosawa, and Martin Scorsese.

Kiarostami’s trademark: poetic dialogues and a documentary filming style in his narrative movies.

When you watch his filmography, you can sense that the writer/director is most interested in political and philosophical issues.

Among his watch-worthy movies: Close-up, and Shirin. But his most popular movie is Taste of Cherry:

Taste of Cherry follows the principles of the Iranian New Wave by rejecting the Western “rules” of cinema.

So, the movie does not have a beginning, middle, and end. No character arc. No ending or closure.

Film students must watch this movie to witness a great example of realism and the documentary style of filming.

You must know that because this movie comes from Iran (a highly conservative Islamic country).

The mastery of Kiarostami is presented by touching on subjects that are taboo in the country and that would result in banning the film.

Therefore, the movie has “hidden” meanings and can be open to interpretation with topics of suicide and homosexuality.

We should warn you though: if you are not familiar with arthouse cinema, Taste of Cherry can be the opposite of entertaining (we don’t want to say boring). But filmmakers and film lovers would know what to appreciate about it.

9. Hiroshima Mon Amour (Dir. Alain Resnais, 1959)

Alain Resnais (1922-2014) is a French Director. He is a name that film buffs and film students should know about specifically for his filming techniques.

He is known for using an unconventional narrative technique and for dealing with difficult themes such as the consciousness, the imagined past, and troubled memory.

These themes and style made many critics criticize Resnais’s movies as being emotionally cold where the filming technique overthrows the characters of the movies.

Although Resnais refused to label himself as a French New Wave director, his movies still align with the philosophy of this film movement.

From his long filmography, you can consider watching Providence and Last Year at Marienbad.

But when you want to get introduced to this director, we recommend to start with his most acclaimed movie: Hiroshima Mon Amour:

Resnais’ revolutionary work of art in cinema is manifested in Hiroshima Mon Amour through the use of time.

The film is about a romantic affair that has little to do with the bomb (The atomic bomb in Hiroshima) while having this historical event present in the background of the events. 

10. Blue Velvet (Dir. David Lynch, 1986)

Davide Lynch is an American filmmaker. He is the most popular surrealist.

Film students who want to have an idea about film styles and about the directors that left their mark in the history of cinema need to be introduced to this auteur director.

David Lynch would be the first director that comes to mind when it comes to contemporary surrealistic cinema.

Lynch is most known for using disturbing and mind-bending visuals.

when you watch a movie for Lynch, you should feel the movie rather than understanding it.

This is because his movies seem to be interested in the idea and the visuals more than the story.

Some of his work: Twin Peaks (TV series), The Elephant Man, and Dune.

They are all good movies, but we choose Blue Velvet as a must-watch movie that film students should be familiar with.

Blue Velvet is a very good introductory for David Lynch and is actually one of his greatest works.

It is considered a masterpiece for mixing dream (actually nightmares) with reality with subconsciousness. And the movie is particularly important for its use of symbolism.

11. 12 Angry Men (Dir. Sidney Lumet, 1957)

Sidney Lumet (1924-2011) is an American director.

Best known for: Strong skills in directing actors.

Maybe Lumet’s work did not change or collaborate in the art of film to the extent that the other directors on this list did. But his directing style is a very good example of classical Hollywood naturalism or realism.

Mainly, his camera movement are very subtle that the audience would not feel the presence of the camera.

His editing honors realism by having invisible cuts. This draws as little attention as possible to the presence of the camera.

His most famous and must-watch movie is 12 Angry Men:

12 Angry Men is a must-watch for filmmakers because it gives an example of how to make a movie compelling using dialogue.

The film is essentially just 12 men arguing around a table for 90 minutes.

The greatness of this film lies in the use of a single location setting. Add to that excellent acting and directing.

12. A Clockwork Orange (Dir. Stanley Kubrick, 1971)

Stanley Kubrick (1928-1999) is one of the few directors who don’t need proof to call an artist and a master of cinema.

Most probably, cinema lovers and film students who are reading this post are already familiar with the director and his work.

We are sure you have already watched at least one of these movies: Lolita, Dr. Strangelove, The Shining, Eyes Wide Shot, Full Metal Jacket…

Kubrick stands as one of the most influential and intelligent filmmakers our world has yet produced.

No where is this better demonstrated than in A Clockwork Orange.

This is one of the most controversial films on this list because of its violent and sexually explicit scenes.

A Clockwork Orange displays the director’s unique style in using tracking shots, symmetry, music, and stylistic directing and acting.

When watching this film pay attention to how Kubrick expresses ideologies through his cinematography and script.

13. Fargo (Dir. Joel & Ethan Coen, 1996)

The most famous and influential directing Duo.

Joel and Ethan Coen or as you may know them: the Coen brothers.

These American directors work with different film genres and usually mix comedy with gory violence.

The brothers have co-directed many movies that are both entertaining and have artistic values such as The Big Lebowski, No Country for Old Men, and Burn After Reading.

And of course: Fargo (the movie)

Fargo is an important film to watch in the crime genre. That is because at its time it challenged the elements of the crime/action genre.

The movie combined action, comedy, suspense, violence, drama…

The story follows a pregnant woman dealing with dangerous and incompetent men. At that time almost all action movies were lead by male actors.

Fargo is a great example of how to create round or three dimensional characters. The characters are believable and real and not designed just to serve that action in the narrative.

14. In The Mood for Love (Dir. Wong Kar-Wai, 2000)

This Chinese director is one of the most important figures in the Hon Kong cinema. He is also among the influential directors worldwide.

Wong Kar-Wai has a distinct style.

The director is known for the use of non-linear narratives. Visually, his movies have strong and saturated colors, and he depends on slow motion in many of his scenes.

Also, music plays an essential role in Wong Kar-Wai’s scenes. Atmospheric music is usually in the background and used to highlight the emotions and the general mood.

The director concretely established his filmmaking trademark in his best movie (in our opinion): In The Mood For Love

Aspiring filmmakers must-watch In the Mood for Love to get introduced to the Chinese cinema and the unique style of Wong Kar-Wai.

This movie is special because of the tone its sets, its use of color, cinematography, and framing.

Notice the use of frame in frame in most of the shots of the movie.

When you want an example of camera language, In The Mood for Love would be the go-to movie.

Trivia: The director and actors improvised most of the movie while filming. It took 15 months to finish shooting. The script and dialogues were changing on set.

We will not elaborate because we don’t want to ruin the experience. You can read this article after watching the movie.

15. Biutiful (Dir. Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, 2010)

Alejandro González Iñárritu is a Mexican film director and screenwriter.

Inarritu is recognized internationally. He was the first Mexican director to be nominated for the best director in the Academy Awards.

He is known for telling international stories about the human condition.

A sample of his work: Babel, Birdman, and The Revenant.

There are many excellent movies in the filmography of Inarritu that may be more popular than the movie we choose: Biutiful

The director offers his audience an entire created world, personal and distinctive. Biutiful is his most accomplished film so far.

The movie is most appreciated for how it portrays the city of Barcelona, and how the director uses tragedy in poetry filmmaking.

16. Dancer in The Dark (Dir. Lars von Trier, 2000)

The Danish director Lars von Trier could be one of the most important art-house film directors in our modern history.

He is the most controversial director on this list.

The movies of Lars Von Trier mostly tackle subjects of mental health, sexuality, and existential issues.

He has directed many important movies such as Dogville, Antichrist, and Melancholia.

We think film students must watch all these movies. But, for this list, we decided to recommend Dancer In The Dark.

If you are familiar with the director you could say that he has better films than Dancer in The Dark.

We agree… But we chose this movie to be on this list because of its uniqueness.

Dancer in the Dark is a tragedy as tragedy movies can be. It is also a musical.

Filmmakers should experience this movie to see how 2 very different genres can be combined.

It is also a great example of how to use music to help tell a story.

17. Persona (Dir. Ingmar Bergman, 1966)

One of the greatest directors in motion picture history. Ingmar Bergman (1918-2007) is a Swedish director and writer.

Among his influential films: Wild Strawberries, The Seventh Seal…

For this list we choose Persona:

Persona is one of his most known and most beautiful movies directed by Bergman.

Film students must watch Persona because it is the best example of the use of close-up.

Notice how the director uses Close-up shots to tell the story and give his scenes a new layer of meaning.

What is also special about the movie is it’s framing:

Bergman cast two similar-looking actresses. and used this resemblance to visually demonstrate the film’s approach to the subject of identity and the psychological state of the characters.

For example, the director films half of the face of the main character with half of the face of the other.

The resulting half-and-half face turned out to be one of the most memorizable shots. The beauty of this shot is that it visually represents the psychological state of the character.

More of these signature shots are there in the movie.

In another shot, he filmed one character in profile, and one face on to the camera. Other times the faces overlap.

Film students, consider this movie as a master class on how you can express the state of teh characters and the theme of the movie visually.

18. Bicycle Thieves (Dir. Vittorio De Sica, 1948)

Vittorio De Sica (1901-1974) is an Italian director and actor. He is a major figure in the Italian neorealism film movement.

He directed many outstanding films, but none with a greater impact on cinema than Bicycle Thieves.

Vittorio de Sica’s 1948 classic Ladri di Biciclette, or Bicycle Thieves is a great example of Italian neorealism.

All the characters are played by people who are not professional actors.

The movie is filmed in real locations (not sets).

And, the traditional storyline of Hollywood movies is absent. Meaning that there is no beginning, middle, and end in the traditional sense.

Critics consider this a communist film: It is both art and politics.

19. All About My Mother (Dir. Pedro Almodóvar, 1999)

Almodovar is considered one of the most internationally successful Spanish filmmakers.

He is the director of women.

His films always explore issues such as sexuality, transgender, and women’s life.

The movies of Almodovar all share complex narratives, melodrama, and popular popular songs.

His trade mark strong colors (especially red) and elaborate sets.

Some of his important films: Talk to Her, Bad Education, Matador.

For this list we choose the movie: All About My Mother

We think that All About My Mother is a good film to watch as an introductory to Almodovar.

The movie is entertaining, and all Almodova’s signatures are there. From the melodrama genre to the bright colors, shiny sets, sexual themes, and unconventional comedy.

20. Taxi Driver (Dir. Martin Scorsese, 1976)

Martin Scorsese is one of the most influential living directors.

He is well known for his duo with Robert Di Nero and later with Leonardo Dicaprio.

Scorsese is known for his risky experiences in directing many genre films. But the trademark of the director is still the gangster and crime movies.

He tends to explore recurrent themes in most of his movies. Most importantly: The Italian-American identity and Catholic concepts of guilt and redemption.

To name some of his important films: Gangs of New York, Raging Bull, The Wolf of Wall Street…

For this list, we think film students must watch Taxi Driver:

Taxi Driver is an American cult film.

The film won several awards, including the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival, and four Oscar nominations.

Watch this movie to experience mastery in acting, and character building.

Pay attention to how the director explored and presented themes of loneliness and remorse.

Also, if you paid attention to details and symbolism, you can find many hints and symbols to Christianity. Then you will be able to “read” the movie on a deeper layer.

The post Why All Film Students Must Watch These Movies? appeared first on AV FilmSchool.

Genre Theory

In the early history of film, genre studies was condemned and associated with commercial and low art films. Genres were only regarded as a restrictive formula to replicate financially successful films.

Around the 50s, film theorists started to study genre films in a different way that will change the perception of genre movies.

Among these theorists were Andre Bazin, and Andrew Sarris under the influence of the Cahiers du cinema. They made a relation between genres and cultural ideologies.

They said that popular movie genres reflect culture.

By that, we can consider genre films as high art and acquire an aesthetic value that is worthy of critical analysis.

Genre theory first started with the French film theorist and critic Andre Bazin. He studied the American westerns and their relation to the American culture.

We will try to summarize the relation between western movies and the American ideologies by talking about 3 western films:

Classical film: Stagecoach (directed by Jon Ford in 1939)
Modern film: Little Big Man (Directed by Arthur Penn in 1970)
Postmodern film: No Country for Old Men (Directed by Ethan Coen and Joel Coen in 2007)

First, what is a Western?

What is the Western movie genre?

The basic theme of western films revolves around conflicts between the civilized whites and the savage Native Americans (the others).

The plot is basically about establishing and maintaining the order on the frontier.

The western hero is a courageous, masculine, moral, and self-sufficient man that faces the villain in a good v/s bad scenario in order to re-establish the order of law.

The typical setting of a western is the American west.

These films usually include elements such as galloping horses, fights, strong and brave cowboy characters.

Western Movies and Western Culture

Bazin pointed out that those ingredients of the western formula can be recognized as signs and symbols of western reality. 

In that sense, an important function of the movie genre is to shed light on contemporary problems or ideologies.

For example, the cowboys with guns represent the fascination with violence.

The western hero encompasses the idea of the last gentleman.

Following the lead of Bazin, the western movie genre can be linked to the contemporary climate and it would be logical to assume that the American western film come as a response for the chaos and violence in the country where the westerner character takes upon himself to re-enforce the law in order to neutralize the chaos of America. 

Stagecoach

Stagecoach is a western directed by Jon Ford in 1939. The movie portrays the trip of a group of characters on a stagecoach across the frontier.

This movie entails the values of the American nation and the history of pre-World War II. The movie resonated with a problematic of racial representation and the fear of the other.

Analyzing the film symbolically, the Native Americans symbolize the enemy or the other. The group of people from various social backgrounds represent American society.

Little Big Man

Little Big Man is western that responds to the modern age. It was directed by Arthur Penn in 1970.

The movie tells the story of Jack Crabb (played by Dustin Hoffman), who was adopted by the Native Americans.

Little Big Man came after the Vietnam War, and it could be argued that it was a response to this historical event.

For example, the cowboys fighting the Indians represent the American and Vietnamese soldiers.

The director broke the rules of the classical western in his anti-western film.

The Hollywood standards of the genre were reversed. In Little Big Man, the Native Americans or the “others” were portrayed as the good guys.

This was by showing them as peaceful and civilized people who are facing systematic extermination by representatives of the US government.

Thus, Little Big Man is a metaphor of imperialism and echoed the value crisis in western countries. 

No Country for Old Men

No Country for Old Men is Directed by Ethan Coen and Joel Coen in 2007).

The movie is about Llewelyn Moss (Josh Brolin) who finds a case of money in the desert and decided to keep it.

A killer named Anton Chigurh (Javier Bardem) locates Moss and his money and tries to hunt Moss down.

Whilst all this is going, Sheriff Ed Tom Bell (Tommy Lee Jones) is overseeing the investigation and begins to see the country in a different light than it once was.

Although the movie still possesses main aspects of the western film such as the setting, and its association of savagery with the racially other, and having the American white male as the protagonist, it diverges from the traditional conventions of the genre by tampering with the expected ending of the western formula.

The hero does not win in the end and the villain gets away!

These deviations from the western formula can be read to be echoing dominant contemporary ideologies such as the war on terror, and the struggle and defeat of the civilized in the face of the uncivilized other.

Conclusion

Genre theory tells us that genres can tell many things about the culture and society of the country that they originated in.

By studying western movies, and analyzing them (Okay.. maybe over-analyzing), we can understand how these movies might be critiquing the society or echoing its concerns.

So, The western genre, in general, is a representation of the chaos and violence in our culture, and the ideology of saving the uncivilized other by that restoring the order of law.

Western movies can be studied in this sense:

Stagecoach represents American society on a stagecoach.

Little Big Man represents the Vietnam war and challenges the concept of racism.

No Country for Old Men represents the struggle and the war on terror.

The post What Western movies tell us about Western Culture appeared first on AV FilmSchool.

When learning the basics of screenplay structure, writers generally talk about stories having 3 acts. That is a beginning, middle and end with a turning point at the end of act 1 and act 2.

Although it’s important to understand how these two turning points work to drive your story forward, there are really five major plot points that dictate the full structure of your story:

The 5 act structure:

1. The inciting incident
2. The lock-in
3. The first culmination (or midpoint)
4. The main culmination
5. The third act twist

These five points are moments that change the momentum of your story.

This narrative structure helps screenplay writers turn the events in the script in a dynamic way. Often by setting the protagonists of the story down a new path or changing their objective.

There are exceptions to every rule but understanding how to use these five moments in your screenplay to help you build the necessary turning points can be key!

1. The Inciting Incident

The inciting incident occurs in the middle of the first act and at the end of your first sequence. It is the first moment that shakes up the status quo.

Before this moment, your protagonist has existed in their own world. But at this point in the story, conflict or big decision presents itself.

The character would not have to decide on what to do next or figure out how to solve the problem. But the audience would start suspecting that there is a big decision coming along the way.

To make this clear consider the movie: The Graduate

Mrs. Robinson asks Ben (a recent college graduate) to give her a ride home where she convinces him to come inside her house and then attempts to seduce him. She then stands in front of him naked and makes it clear that she is sexually available for him. Here, Ben did not give a clear decision about what he wants or what he is about to do… he just nervously tries to escape the room.

At this point, Ben has not entered into a relationship with Mrs. Robinson. However, the door has been open to that very opportunity.

We still have more to come in the first act, but we won’t be surprised when he later makes the call and begins the affair.

2. The Lock-in

The lock-in is the moment at which your protagonist can no longer return to the status quo. Backing out is impossible.

Often the character is literally locked up with handcuffs, stranded, or abducted.

The door which was open to the protagonist earlier at the inciting incident now slams closed behind your character.

This would not only establish your protagonist’s objective but also will drive them forward into the second act.

For example, In the Matrix, Neo meets Morpheus who explains The Matrix is a false reality. Morpheus then holds out two pills: if Neo takes the blue pill he’ll wake up in his bed and believe whatever he wants. But, if he takes the red pill, then he’ll stay in Wonderland and Morpheus will show him how deep the rabbit-hole goes.

Here is the inciting incident.

As we move to the lock-in, Neo takes the red pill.

Clearly, Neo is now locked in. There is no going back. He has liberated himself from the false reality of the matrix.

3. The First Culmination / Midpoint

About halfway through every screenplay, your protagonist achieves their first major success or failure.

This is the midpoint of the 5 major plot point structure.

When the midpoint is a success, then it’s an achievement of a smaller goal on the road to the main objective.

Alternatively, when this culmination (or midpoint) is a failure, it moves your protagonists even farther from their objective.

In Forrest Gump, Forrest accidentally ends up on the stage as part of an anti-war rally and is asked to speak to thousands of people filling the National Mall. Even though the microphone cuts out during a speech, Jenny hears his name and yells out from the crowd. Forrest and Jenny run to each other reuniting in the reflecting pool to the cheers of thousands.

Despite all of his other accomplishments, this is the high point in forest life because, in the end, all he really ever wants is Jenny. She was lost but now she’s found.

4. The Main Culmination

The main culmination can be thought of as the climax of the film.

It is the highest or lowest point for your protagonist so far.

The Climax is usually represented through a major success or failure that brings your character’s second act objective to a close and propels them towards a new goal in the third act.

for example, in The Shawshank Redemption: Andy Dufresne asks the warden to help him get another trial and promised that he won’t reveal the money laundering schemes that he set up for him. The warden reacts by throwing Andy in solitary confinement. Now not only is Andy refused the opportunity to prove his innocence but in the immediate aftermath of this scene, the warden sends the only inmate who can testify in Andy’s behalf to his death sentence.

This is the lowest low for Andy Dufresne. He really is an innocent man and now he has no hope to ever breathe the air beyond Shawshank Prison.

5. The Third-act Twist

The third-act twist occurs approximately halfway between the main culmination at the end of your story.

It is the bone thrown in front of the protagonist to help him achieve his third act objective. This is the moment that changes the trajectory of the character in the final act.

This third act twist is different from the other 5 major plot points because it actually changes the plot.

In Scorsese’s Goodfellows, Henry meets his best friend Jimmy in a diner only to realize that Jimmy plans on having him killed. This unexpected turn of events then forces Henry to cut a deal with the authorities where he rats on his friends and enters the witness protection program.

Importance of the 5 plot points

These 5 major plot points are the building blocks behind three-act structure and sequence construction. Mapping out these points early in your screenplay development process will go a long way to help navigate the writing of your script. 

You can check out the article about the 13 beats of the script that expands on these 5 plot points in more detail.

The post The 5 major plot points of a Screenplay appeared first on AV FilmSchool.

Auteur is the French translation to “the author”. Auteur directors make films with their unique style and can express ideas and ideologies through cinema. In this sense, the audience can read the film instead of just watching it.

When we look at the auteur theory we have to keep in mind that a film is a collaborative medium. Many creative minds put their input in making the film, and not just the director.

We should not disregard the importance of the writers, cinematographers, actors, editors, crew… Instead, we will regard the director as the conductor of this team and the decision-maker. This is why the auteur theory considers a film as the product of the director.

History of the Auteur Theory

Auteur theory came to light in the 1950s in France. Although the term has been circulating in film studies long before that. During the Second World War, American films were banned in France due to the German occupation. But after the war ended, American movies flooded the French cinemas. At that time, French film critics were hungry for good cinema and began studying French and American films.

These critics (of the film magazine cahier du cinema) accused French films of depending only on the script and disregarding the visual element of cinema. They considered that these movies have low artistic value and that they lack social realism.

Critics were also fed up with movies produced and written by the same old filmmakers (They called these movies: Cinema de papa).

In response to this situation, the Cahiers group considered “better” movies that have unique visual style and that hold ideological and psychological baggage to be auteur cinema.

They argued that just because American directors had little say over the production process, this did not mean that they could not have the auteur status. So they had a special recognition for directors like Alfred Hitchcock, Howard Hawkes, John Ford, and Samuel Fuller.

Another form of auteurism is the total author where directors have complete authority over their movies.

Examples are Jean-Luc Godard, Agnès Varda in France, Wim Wenders, Margarethe von Trotta in Germany, and David Lynch in the United States. 

List of Auteur Directors

• Alfred Hitchcock
• Howard Hawkes
• John Ford
• Samuel Fuller
• Jean Vigo
• Jean Renoir
• Jean-Luc Godard
• Agnès Varda
• Rainer Werner Fassbinder
• Wim Wenders
• Margarethe von Trotta
• Orson Welles
• Stanley Kubrick
• David Lynch

When you watch the films of these directors you will easily recognize a unique style in all their movies. You can probably know a Hitchcock film without reading his name on the credits.

When does a Director become an Auteur?

There is no list that the movies of a director should fulfill in order to be considered an auteur. In order to apply this theory, we should study every director separately. I will try to make a checklist or criteria to label auteur films, but this list is not exclusive, and not all films have to contain all these elements.

Elements of the Auteur Movies/Directors

• Movies of the director have a unique and distinct style
• The movies of the director share similar themes
• The director is the screenplay writer
• Films are independently produced (not studio films)
• Movies depend heavily on visual style (camera language)
• Movies communicate philosophical, psychological, or social ideologies

Alfred Hitchcock: Theme Auteur

Let’s see then why Hitchcock is an auteur director.

First, all his films follow the same genre: Thriller. The suspense became Hitchcock’s signature in movies. All the movies directed by Hitchcock have psychologically complex characters, and we expect twisted ending in the resolution. Concerning the themes of the movies, Hitchcock films usually center around ordinary characters who are wrongfully accused. The director also has a special interest in the mother-son relationship.

Let’s examine some of Hitchcock’s famous films and see how this pattern exists in most of his movies:

Shadow of a Doubt: The routine of an ordinary family is disrupted when trouble comes with Uncle Charlie when he visits them.

Vertigo: The main character (Johnny) is accused of the murder. In fact, Johnny couldn’t save his partner and the woman he was assigned to follow because he actually couldn’t save them due to his fear of hight.

North by Northwest: The police and criminals are both following the main character (Roger Thornhill) because each side thinks he is someone else. then, there is the “Mother”. the first person Roger calls when he gets arrested is Mother, only to discover later that she is anything but affectionate to her son.

Psycho: The ultimate representation of the unhealthy mother-son relationship.

Easy Virtue: John’s mother does not approve of his wife. The mother believes that the wife is hiding a secret, and will do whatever she can to reveal the truth.

Jean-Luc Godard: Style Auteur

All the French New Wave directors are considered auteur. After all, the auteur theory was popularized by the filmmakers and critics of this wave. In an article about auteurism, I can not but talk about the French Director/writer/critic Jean-Luc Godard.

He made many great films that defined the auteur theory and the French New wave. His films are still enjoyable and worth watching till now. Some of Godards movies include Breathless (1960),  Le Mépris (1963), and Pierrot le Fou (1965).

We can recognize the signature of Godard in all his movies mainly through his unique and innovative style. Godard’s filming tends to disregard the rules of filmmaking. So he uses jump cuts heavily in his films. He also relies mostly on a hand-held camera. His movies are mostly shot in real locations using natural light.

But the most important thing in Godard’s films (as an auteur) is: Drawing attention to the cinematic artifice.

This means that Godards (and all French New Wave filmmakers) have no problem in reminding the audience that they are watching a film. This can be done by talking about cinema or revealing the filming process. So his characters may directly address the camera or are filmmakers themselves.

We can recognize a recurring theme in Godards movies.

His themes mostly reflect the existential crisis and the boredom of the youth. And this is not only reflected in the story and the characters of the film, but also the style. These themes can be explored through the non-motivated dialogue and the non-linear and fragmented narrative of the film.

Practical uses of the Auteur Theory

• Study the whole filmography of a director instead of singular films
• A tool to understand the personality and philosophy of the director through his or her movies
• Help to point out unique cinematic techniques and to label them (Hitchcockian style or Tarantino style) in order to be re-used by other filmmakers
• Relate the movies and themes used by a director to his or her personal life

Criticism of Auteur Theory

Many critics and readers are against this theory. They think that the auteur theory is useless and does not qualify as a theory. This point of view has many arguments that seem to be logical.

First, why should all the credit go the one person (The director)?

That is, as we all know, any film is the product of many people. Screenplay writers can have their own consistent style, so why can’t they be considered film auteurs?

Actors, directors, editors, cinematographers, special effect artists all have a significant input in a movie, they have their own style. Can’t they all be auteurs?

Then, why in the first place should there be a signature style in all the movies of an “auteur director”?

After all, a good film should stand on its own. So why should we study the whole filmography of a director who might have good and bad movies in his/her showreel?

Learn more about the Auteur Film Theory:

YouTube Video: The Origins of Auteur Theory by Filmmaker IQ (Recommended)
Book: Postmodern Auteurs: Coppola, Lucas, De Palma, Spielberg and Scorsese (Recommended)
E-Book: Auteur Theory and My Son John (Film Theory in Practice)

The post Film Theory: The Auteur Theory appeared first on AV FilmSchool.

TV shows are being more and more cinematic… This would make us think if TV is taking the place of cinema. If so, will cinema eventually die and become history?

The Second Golden Age of TV

In an era that is described as the television’s second golden age, TV stations ( HBO, FX…) and online streaming platforms (Netflix, Hulu…) are competing to produce TV series with interesting plots, sophisticated filming techniques, and high production values. In addition to the economic success of these products, some TV series combined rich plots with stylized storytelling, which gave them critical acknowledgment and big viewership. Consider for example quality TV shows like The Handmaid’s Tale and Game of Thrones. All this led to shows that I would like to describe as cinematic TV series, or quality TV that has a cinematic look. As established film directors, producers and actors are venturing into TV series, we say that the line between cinema and TV is blurring.

Technology made it possible for the audience to choose among several platforms to watch films. We can now choose to watch a movie in the traditional way by going to a movie theater, buying a ticket and watching the film on the giant screen in the dark. Or we can chose to watch the film on a TV set at home with available options of considerably big 4K high definition screen and 5.1 surround system. Of course, the movie going rewards a different experience, but it would be rather easier, cheaper, time efficient, more flexible, and more accessible to watch a film on a DVD, VOD (Video on demand), online streaming, or even a broadcasted film. The film industry is going to the extent of producing films exclusively for the online streaming platforms. Certain quality films produced by Netflix are not screened in movie theaters.

In such cases, what would be the difference between watching a film or an episode of a quality series on Netflix?  And why wouldn’t both productions be considered cinematic? Such questions may bring up the thought that TV, and online TV, is taking over the traditional cinema, and may also introduce the idea of the decline of cinema and the rebirth of TV.

The Death of Cinema?!

The death of cinema is not a new concept. Cinema has faced many technological advancements throughout its history. First, the introduction of sound, and then the wide screen formats. These advancements changed the way films were produced and distributed. But the notion of the (hypothetical) death of cinema that concerns this article is the impact of television on cinema. To be clear, I don’t blame contemporary TV series for this assumed death of cinema. But the effect of television as a medium on cinema has long been discussed by many critics and scholars. Some went to the extent of saying that the invention of TV was starting point for the death of cinema.

The death of cinema does not mean the vanishing of cinema as a medium where films cease to exist and cinema theaters close their doors. It would rather refer to a shift in the dominant narrative medium. Meaning that cinema loses its hegemony in being the main source of audio/visual storytelling to TV. But, as the quality of television had developed, one might be able to think of this phenomenon as if television is being affected by cinema. But this idea may be controversial. Film critics tend to be defensive about cinema and refuse to transcend its artistic legacy to TV. Critics consider that the big screen is essential for the existence of cinema. Only the films that are watched in a movie theater projection, in the dark, without the ability to interrupt or modify the experience can be regarded as cinema.

The improvement of TV’s content should not mean that one medium would replace the other. Traditional TV programming contained mainly soap operas and sitcoms, which characterised the medium. But during the 1980s and 1990s, the style and content of these programs went through a considerable change. TV series started to stand in opposition of the mass-audience popular forms. This lead to rise of cultural niche programs (think of Twin Peaks, The Sopranos, and The Wire).

But is TV actually taking the place of cinema?

There are two approaches for this question:

1. Audiences prefer TV over going to cinema

If the question is suggesting that people are just watching TV rather than cinema, then the answer is NO!

TV is not taking the place of cinema in this sense. And the numbers back this argument. According to The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the number of movie admissions and film revenue seem to be fairly stable in the last couple of years. Statistics show that the admission number to cinema has been almost stable since the 1970s. So there is no sensible negative effect of the rise of cinematic Quality TV series on the popularity of cinema. This rise in quality in TV shows has started since the 90s (about 30 years ago). It would be far fetched to consider this (relatively new) genre of TV to be competing with the 100 year of cinema. Cinema seems to be standing strong as the main source for narrative and fiction entertainment.

2. TV is replacing cinema in the artistic sense

Another way to answer the question is by looking at the question in the artistic sense. So, the question would be: Is TV replacing cinema as the home for artistic audio/visual storytelling?

Here I would give my vote for TV. The shows of this second golden age of TV are having great cinematic quality and artistic value. In comparison you can easily notice that the movies that are gaining the most recognition are commercial movies. Mainly action, fantasy and super-hero genres. The more “serious” content is on TV. There you can find many popular shows with deep psychological characters, controversial plots, symbolic meanings, and creative story-telling… Think of shows like The Handmaid’s Tale, The Man in the High Castle, The Young Pope, Mr. Robot, The Affair, Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones... and many others. Please write the name of the shows that you think we must add to this list in the comment section.
I will not dive deeper in the artistic value of TV, but you can read about Art in film here.

On an ending note, I think that we should not consider TV and cinema as enemies in a war where one should take the place of the other. Each has its own experience. Cinema has (and still is) providing us with great movies that satisfies all tastes. TV is picking up in the artistic sense, and the quality of its content is increasing. After TV was based mainly on soap operas, sitcoms, and talk/game/reality shows. The more competition, the more good content for us!!

What do you think about this cinema V/S TV argument? I would like to read your thoughts.

The post The Death of Cinema: Is TV taking the Place of Cinema? appeared first on AV FilmSchool.

Citizen Kane Summary

The movie starts with an old man on his dying bed. In the first scene the man says the word: “Rosebud” before he dies. And the journey begins in a search for the mystery of the meaning of Rosebub. After that it is revealed that this old man is actually the wealthy newspaper publisher Charles Kane. The audience are introduced to a documentary about the life of Charles Kane. The producer of this showreel is unsatisfied by the result because he thinks that it does not reflect the real character of Kane, so he send a reporter to search for the meaning of Kane’s last word. The reporter starts his investigation and interviews different people who were close to Kane in an attempt to find the meaning of Rosebub. The movie tells us the story of Kane from his childhood until he died through the interviews of his associates and through flashbacks. 

Why is Citizen Kane and Important Movie?

Citizen Kane was considered as a turning point towards a new form of narrative cinema where the movie defied the conventions of the classical movie narrative. The story of the film is told from the perspective of six narrators by a series of flashbacks. This way of storytelling added complexity and ambiguity to the film narrative. Another modification in the typical narrative is that the film presented the ending of Kane since the beginning, the viewer knows that Kane will be successful and rich and that he will die at an old age. The enjoyment that the audience get from the narrative is no longer through suspense about what will happen to the character, but rather from understanding why his life turned out the way it did. In Citizen Kane, the spectator needs to put together bits and pieces presented by the six different narrators in order to get a hold on the whole narrative.

The ending: What is Rosebud?

In the end of the movie, the characters did not succeed in knowing the significance of the word “Rosebud”, but we are given an additional shot that Rosebud was engraved on a sled that belonged to the young Kane before he was taken from his parents. So, before the last shot the film ends with an open ending. But the final shot introduced the meaning of Rosebud to the audience and not to the characters. By that the movie has 2 endings. This is a new technique which adds to importance of Citizen Kane in film history.

The post Why is Citizen Kane Important? appeared first on AV FilmSchool.

Simply put, a narrative film is a movie that tells a story. So any form of film that follows a chain of events is narrative.

Many people think that only fiction movies are narrative. But documentaries and movies that tell a real story can also be considered narrative films as long as there is a beginning point that develops throughout the events and leads to a sort of conclusion.

In this post, we will be focusing on the 2 main types of narrative: The liniar and the non-linear narrative.

The Linear Narrative

Linear is pretty self-explanatory. It’s a story that follows one line of narrative.

So, imagine that the movie is a journey from point A to point B. Throughout this journey, the events will drive the story of the movie.

The movie first starts with the stage of exposition. This part is often referred to as the stage of equilibrium. Here the scene is being set to the audience, and the world of the characters is presented.

Then, the disequilibrium. This is when something disrupts the state of normal and causes the events of the story to happen.

As the events complicate, the events of the movie ultimately reach the climax. A point where the stakes for the characters are the highest.

When this peak point is reached, the main characters will try now harder to restore the equilibrium.

The movie ends with the resolution. Here, the main characters would achieve in returning to the initial point. They could also reach another point that better or worse from where they initially started at the beginning of the movie. But they learned their lesson and suffered the circumstances.

For example, let’s use Toy Story.

By the end of the movie, Buzz has accepted his fate as a toy and is welcomed into Andy’s group of toys. whereas at the beginning he wasn’t even there.

So, to put it short, a linear narrative goes like this:
Movies start where characters in their everyday life, something happens that shakes this normality. Then, things get worse as the characters try to fix them. The movie ends with the characters returning to where they started or learning something new or even failing hard at it.

As you might now be thinking: Not all movies follow this linear narrative structure… you are correct.. here comes the non-linear structure.

Non-linear Narrative

The non-linear narrative tends to break up this simple line and put it back together in a different order.

These are the movies that do not follow the three act structure.

All Movies have a begining, middle, and end… But not necessarly in this order

Godards

Movies that follow this type of narrative like to mix things up. And because the events are not told in a straightforward manner, it will be up to the audience to do the thinking and guessing in order to understand the story and figure out the chronological order of the events of the story.

This doesn’t mean that movies with a non-linear narrative are ALWAYS hard to understand…

Almost all French New Wave movies follow the non-linear narrative… But Let’s have more known and popular movies as examples in this post.

A good example of a complicated non-linear narrative would be Christopher Nolan’s Memento.

Memento has two sets of narratives running throughout the film. One in black and white and one in color.

These two narratives are broken up and mixed together! So you see a piece of one then a piece of the second and then back to the first… Scenes in black and white and other scenes in color.

Already the narrative is pretty nonlinear.

But memento takes it another step further. The colored narrative is actually being shown to us in Reverse.

The black and white sequence starts at the beginning and the colored sequence starts at the end. This completely screws up the narrative with the final clip transitioning from black and white to color showing the end of the first narrative and the start of the second. 

I think that is as much complicated as it can be for a movie. But there are many other examples for movies that do not have a linear narrative structure but are still easy to follow and understand.

let’s take a look at Forrest Gump as an example. The movie has a nonlinear narrative and it’s really easy to understand. 

Many people will argue that Forrest Gump actually follows a linear structure… After all, it follows Forrest from when he was a boy, we see him grow up to an adult. But the thing is it’s a broken story.

The movie starts with Forrest waiting on a bus stop, and the movie continues as Forrest is telling other people how he came to this point.

So, in a way, Forrest Gump starts from the end and takes us back to the beginning through Forrest’s stories.

In the case of Forrest Gump, the use of the non-linear narrative was not to make the movie more complicated or to make an artistic statement. The non-linear narrative can also be a convenient way for the writers to easily skip through all the boring bits that happen in between the events of a movie.

Conclusion

There is no better or correct narrative structure. Linear narratives are of course very successful. But it’s important to try out new things when writing your own screenplay.

If you are writing a screenplay, try messing up the order of events by having the end at the beginning or, putting bits in the wrong order. See if it makes your story more compelling and powerful. If it doesn’t add anything then leave it you’ve tried and that’s what’s important.

The post Film Narrative appeared first on AV FilmSchool.