The words or opinions expressed by contributors to the BFI 75 website are not those of the BFI or its employees and the BFI takes no responsibility for such words or the opinions expressed. However please contact webteam@bfi.org.uk if you find anything offensive or defamatory and the BFI will consider removing it.
Classic Powell and Pressburger production, with some wonderful performances (incl David Niven, not the most gifted of actors), and incredible cinematography from Jack Cardiff. Simply the best.
Within these pages I have made some not too kind remarks about commercial cinema. I have been critical of directors such as Spielberg and Lucas. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being simply entertained. However, there has to be more to the cinema than that. Film should also be a tool for enlightenment, education and illumination. It should touch the conscience and intelligence of the spectator. Not necessarily by being preachy but by observing life and by reflecting society. Continental cinema still achieves this to a marked extent but British and American film has lost that sensibility. This is a great shame.
The quality and success of a film should not be measured by profits alone. It is possible and, I believe, should be desirable for art and commerce to work side-by-side.What has been very damaging for the industry has been the huge pay-checks of stars.This has resulted in the investment of massive budgets attached to projects and the pressure to secure a huge financial return.The consequence of this is that smaller productions cease to exist or find it near impossible to get finance.
I am personally attracted to movies of the past because I believe that were better crafted. Also the people who made them generally didn't have one eye on the box office. They made films because they loved making them and did their utmost to create the best possible product. Directors like Lean, Wyler, Stevens, Kazan and Hitchcock defined their success by the quality their work and if financial success followed that was a bonus. They had not only self-respect but respect for their audience. They believed in the virtues of good writing, fine actors and accomplished cinematographers. Ask most people ( and I mean so-called film buffs, not just Joe Public ) and they would have a vague clue who D W Griffith and John Ford were. A sad state of affairs.
The future? Who knows! I am rather pessimistic. There is talent out there, that's for sure. So let's put craftsmanship first and profits second. I know it sounds incredibly naive but things have to change. So, here's to movies. GOOD movies.
Beautiful design.
Thanks, webmaster.
In response to Christina F's comment on the empowerment of cheap digital film making technology and others like it.
The fact of the matter is that whilst cheap digital technology has empowered people to produce their own images and narratives to a point, they remain highly personal and undistributed and pose no threat to the film making industry proper. The idea that a new wave of democratic digital film makers is just waiting in the wings to usurp the national cinema industries is a poor assessment and one I have been listening to and reading about ever since Super 8mm made it into people's homes. You might make a film on video with your friends but that is all you will do. Access to funding and more importantly distribution and exhibition are as protected by the hegemonic mainstream as they ever were. And how will "poor" film makers compete with the behemoth PR campaigns and agencies that accompany even the most "independent" of cinema? As industrial capitalism continues to concentrate wealth and influence into an ever decreasing small number of hands those on the outside will be forever kept there.
A film that can make me laugh at the thought of mass suicide through nuclear warfare is always a winner.
I hope it will be fantastic. The way technology is going, many fantasy and sci fi films will hopefully have the most real quality about them yet and so the effects will be indistingushable from the real actors and such.
However I think more time should be taken over creating amazing scripts that aren't similar to many other things and plots which don't have holes.
films should be made for the enjoyment of all people who want to watch it, not something to rake in all the money as the first idea to making a film (the same applies to making sequels etc).
More time should be given to picking actors who would really do the roles justice and directors who really have vision. And adaptations from books should really stay as close to the truth from the book and try to follow all the description that authors give us.
Paul Greengrass, Christopher Nolan.
I can't wait to see what type of films that they're making in 20 years time.
I'm also looking forward to James Cameroon's next film and whether using 3D techonlogy can improve a film, your experiance watching it or whether it just turns out to distract or if it ends up being used to cover flaws in other aspects of the film.
Surely these must be in anyone's list of top movies.
can we have some todd-ao films or cinerama 3 strip like they have at the bradford film festival or a wide screen week end thank you
Film audiences today expect special effects - but remember characters and story. What would happen to a film like Harvey with todays technology - some very clever person would animate the rabbit - and the audience would lose out. Treat the audience with respect, allow them to be intelligent and use imagination and creativity.
New (digital) technology means two things. First there are better techniques for cleaning up, remastering and screening older films. Secondly - and quite specifically in this decade of DVD - that people also want to see restored and extra footage, and different cuts or editions.
It's possible that we are in a period where there is a minor boom in the consumption, rediscovery and understanding of cinema. Consequently there may well be a corresponding creative surge to follow. I hope so!
truly a childhood rememberance
I agree, an utterly flawless performance by one of the greatest living actors.
With the better technology available to so many more poor filmmakers, we will finally see a new age of different and unique films. No longer in the hands of just the rich, I think we will develop new, exciting and enriching films that touch everyone.
http://www.fest21.com/video/terry_gilliam
Great: another blog on future of cinema!
http://www.fest21.com/blog/futureofcinema
Watch videos of our panelists sharing views on Future of Cinema
Bruno Chatelin
What excites me about the future of Film is the history of its past. There have been so many great films and I have been privileged to see so many of them in my not inconsiderable lifespan. My recent viewing of some of the classics of the 30's, 40's and early 50's with David Lean, Powell and Pressburger, Merchant and Ivory convince me that there have always been great films and great film makers. More frecently watching the remarkable No Country for Old Men assures me that there always will be. Times may change and fashions will always be ephemeral. But creativity is eternal. As long as there are visionaries and creative geniuses, films will be made that will shock, delight, uplift and transform us to the degree that makes life an inspiration worth living.
Is this the perfect film? Well the music by Alex North has really set the standard for almost 50 years. A dark and downbeat epic. Credit to Douglas for directing the director.
I have to say Tommy is my favorite film of Ken's. The actors and editing are excellent and it contains one of the wildest scenes I've ever seen with Ann Margret getting very messy.
Aside from Blade Runner (which I voted for here), this is my favourite film of all time. It's elegant, it's atmospheric, it's disturbing, it's occasionally quite funny, it's a masterpiece.