![]() ![]() ![]() Frame enlargement from the anthology film, La française et l’amour (Boirond, Clair, et al., 1960), in which a voice-over refers to the “avant-garde” film, Pickpocket (Bresson, 1959). We form a sense of how Pickpocket was promoted in Paris from this example, recently shared with me by installation artist, filmmaker, and Bresson historian Richard Bevan: Figure 3. Courtesy of Chia-Chin Hsieh.įor the Bresson aficionado, the ads are fascinating for the simple reason that, on strictly visual terms, they differ radically from those found in the West. Advertisement for Pickpocket (Bresson, 1959) in People’s Voice Daily (Taichung), 15 September 1961. Later in the year, the third theater, the “Tunghai,” paid for ad space in a different newspaper: Figure 2. Advertisement (left) for Pickpocket (Bresson, 1959) in the United Daily News (New Taipei City), 14 July 1961. The first two theaters printed the following advertisement: Figure 1. At least three theaters exhibited the film (two in Taipei, the “First” theater and the “Taipei” one in Taichung, the “Tunghai”). The film, about a young Parisian man who turns to a career of pickpocketing to avoid a life of destitution, was released in Taiwan in 1961. The discovery was made by cinephile Chia-Chin Hsieh, to whom I am indebted for allowing me to “piggyback” on his findings.įrench auteur Robert Bresson (1901–1999) released one of his most influential features, Pickpocket, in 1959. Which brings me to a recent discovery, brought to my attention by my colleague Chang-Min Yu of National Taiwan University. We don’t always find reciprocity or solidarity where we go looking for it. The words of the filmmaker and the words of a “distant” national or regional film culture may seem to line up, but the terms preferred locally, even when translated, may (and surely often do!) carry radically different meanings, associations, and values. In cases like this we must be on the lookout for signs that the relation simply isn’t there, that the hunch at the core of the relation breaks down. I value the things you do, both sides seem to obliquely confess.īut what do we do with this way of looking at the market when we move across cultures to consider critical languages the filmmaker is unlikely to encounter or have mastered? This synchrony of languages (the filmmaker’s, the culture’s) can signal a subtle form of expression–an expression of solidarity, of mutual regard and even respect. Filmmakers offer movies a viewing community will want to consume and stimulating suggestions as to how to consume them the community offers institutional and discursive support in response, directly and indirectly showing preference for certain movies over others, and for certain forms of consumption over others, too.Įspecially intriguing are moments when the languages of filmmakers and their cultures line up, as it were, when a filmmaker’s way of explaining or amplifying the significance of their films (in interviews, let’s say) aligns with the words cultures use to express admiration for cinema. Cultures can do this by shoring up the institutional presence of filmmakers (planning screenings or public appearances) or simply by writing reviews (ones that by turns reassure, provoke, and irritate the filmmaker, hopefully in beneficial ways). Doing so helps us understand the choices filmmakers make in relation to the choices their cultures make.įilmmakers make choices on the set and in terms of how to present or “frame” their work publicly whereas cultures choose how to reciprocate, with various forms of attention sent the way of filmmakers. In this space I have often commented on the importance of looking into the cultural market for film. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |