Re: how come we still talk primarily about directors?
dober...@dropsocal.rr.com
symphonic
...@hotmail.com (choral reef) wrote:
>some people are more partial to 'auteur theory' than others. some
>reject it passionately.
>yet, all of us still talk of the director as being the primary
>artistic force behind movies.
>for instance, like LOR or not, we generally discuss it as the
>visionary creation of peter jackson. few, if any, have mentioned the
>writers, editor, cameraman, CGI geeks, etc by name.
Most of us probably just refer to the director as a metonymic (or
synecdochic) shortcut; it's for the sake of convenience.
>but shouldn't anti-auteurists call this figure a
>prodiractortographeditorgaffer?
Well, now. . . in a long career of unusual suggestions, you've really
outdone yourself there!
--
Hope, Joy, Youth, Peace, Rest, Life, Dust,
Ashes, Waste, Want, Ruin, Despair, Madness,
Death, Cunning, Folly, Words, Wigs, Rags,
Sheepskin, Plunder, Precedent, Jargon, Gammon, and Spinach
