The Soul of Cinema
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 июн 2023
- Support us on Patreon:
/ cinemacartography
What is the Soul of Cinema? What is that element that distinguishes a good film from a great one? What is it with Film that distinguishes it from any other Art form? We explore those questions and more here.
For business inquiries: contact@thecinemacartography.com
("The Soul of Cinema" is a reupload from The Cinema Cartography Season I, 29 April 2019) 
Кино
been watching since this was called channel criswell this is one of the best RUclips channels ever I swear to god
10000%. The Channel Criswell days were great.
Facts
It is, there are channels that share good music that are respectively as excellent in what they’re doing - as with many things - but as for “Art in context” and cinema in context, this is the best pertinent channel.
It almost transcends content, this is my Cahiers Du Cinema mag
Seems so long ago. Weird
Agreed. But capitalize the G in God damnit lol.
I saw 8 1/2 about a month ago and my mind was blown. Felt like a movie that spoke to my true nature in ways that I've never felt before. I was called out by characters, I had such a strong transference with the main character and the story just for some reason made sense to me. One of my new favorite films.
I can't understand why I always have the sudden urge to cry while watching your videos, it is beautiful, fascinating
No it just because you are a kid who cant control your emotions whenever you are exposed to a communication medium.
Not an art form, but a MEDIUM.
@@jangdi. I don't agree. Movies can be art - it's simply a different medium from canvass or stone. All art 'communicates', and if it brings certain emotions to the surface; it's fulfilled its purpose. And then, there's your tone - no need to be judgemental in your assessment of @hugbanque6467's character.
@@jangdi. You dont think movies are art?
@@curiousworld7912 I didnt talk about movie, I talked about his childlike reaction on a informative videos.
Movies of course belong to art. But not this spoonfed ideology of what and how movies is "art", not in this manipulative sense.
Yo, I thought this guy was gonna finish his series on the history of cinema
Yeah that would be nice
You can't rush art!
This made me feel so emotional. This is why I love cinema and the expression it allows us to create.
Guys, the opening song is "First breath after coma" by Explosions in the sky, absolutely beautiful matches so well with this beautiful essay
There's a certain hubris to modern-day society to get so offended that Martin Scorsese said he didn't think the Marvel movies were cinema.
Got so offended that they got so offended???
Yeah like is there even an argument? People have forgotten what true art is
It’s semantics, most people do realize the difference between a marvel film and a movie with more going for it. It just sounds pretentious when you say bluntly that “marvel is not cinema”
@@h_shah5429 It's ignorance as usual much the same way these idiots use the word Fascist.
@@h_shah5429if you're being called pretentious by unwashed funko pop collectors, you must be doing something right 😂
This channel speaks to my soul.
Saying things isn’t an issue … it’s large swaths of the population who are not willing and able to listen.
Thank you, very well done and written.
Thank you for your beautiful, honest work. Thank you for educating us. Thank you for inspiring us.
I just want to say I really loved your video on Tarantino! I must admit I am a unapologetic Tarantino diehard and I was initially ready to angrily refute your video before watching it. I thought the ruse of the title paired with disabling comments was very clever. A brilliant film essay, definitely subbed!
You make some of the best documentaries about films I ever saw.
fantastic video!! you’re the best
Bravo, a moving and articulate overview of what film can and sometimes is.
When the opening played 😭😭😭, so nice to listen your favourite piece of all time
On the silver globe es hermosa y esplendida
La vi hace un mes, buenísima, possession está bien también del mismo director. ¿Alguna sugerencia de ver otras pelis?
@@ZPALMY Diabel, The Public Woman, That Most Important Thing: Love and The Third Part of The Night.
Graceful piece of work! Thanks for sharing your insight with us. Best Regards.
I heard that Silver Mt. Zion in the background
Could you add the films used in this video? Thanks so much!
Not all movies but the majority: The Great Train Robbery (1903), Nuovo Cinema Paradiso (1988), Derzu Uzala (1975), Citizen Kane (1941), King of Comdey (1983), Persona (1966), The Third Man (1949), Hugo (2011), The Night of the Hunter (1955), Andrei Rublev (1966), Sunset Boulevard (1950), Roma (2018), Rashomon (1950), Deer Hunter (1978), Fallen Angels (1995), Enter the Void (2009), Le Mépris (1963), The Revenant (2015), Stalker (1979), Synecdoche, New York (2008), Nil by Mouth (1997), Cidade de Deus (2002), Offret (1986), 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), The VVitch (2015), Sunrise (1927), Reservoir Dogs (1992), Funny Games (2007), There Will Be Blood (2007), Un Chien Andalou (1929), À bout de souffle (1960), Bande à part (1964), Only God Forgives (2013), Barry Lyndon (1975), Eraserhead (1977), Close-Up (1990), Raid 2 (2014; I'm not really sure, though), Flowers of Shanghai (1998; also not sure), Blow Up (1966), Man with a Movie Camera (1929), Singin' in the Rain (1952), Ed Wood (1994), the triptych consists of Touch of Evil (1958), Goodfellas (1990), and maybe Saturday Night Fever (1977), Fight Club (1999), Living in Oblivion (1995); Adaptation (2002), Holy Mountain (1973), Amélie (2001), A Man Escaped (1956). After 8 1/2 segment: La Jetée (1962), Koyaanisqatsi (1982; probably), Master (2012), Days of Heaven (1978), Once Upon a time in America (1984; I remember similar episode in this film, so I'm not certain), Her (2013), Manhattan (1979), Amadeus (1984), The Truman Show (1998), Cape Fear (1991), The Searchers (1956). That's that
@@screentrader2069 the film after Her (2013) is Floating Weed directed by Ozu
Please put the name of the movies into the video, when you use a clip. They look so beautiful and I don't know their name :')
Beautiful, thank you.
"Ghosts appear and fade away", Colin Hay, Men at Work; Overkill
MORE PLEASE
You're an essential part of this continuum. You're unraveling of themes and ides and profound questions make all of it better. Your videos make me realize how important this form of communication is for society, culture, and humanity. Thank you.
Interesting angle in cinema and storytelling. fabulous resource. It would be great and helpful if you could also list the films shown in this essay also, even if in the description.
Excellent video
Beautiful video ❤
The best yt channel
Hear, hear!
Fantastic.
I've been a longtime viewer of your videos.
a favorite channel of mine, but there was no comments feature before
Thanks
Babe wake up, new Cinema Cartography dropped
A similar idea was put forth in the movie "Babylon".
❤ Beautiful Video
Lovely :)
God, I love this yt channel
The problem with Auteur Theory is not that it's shallow; the problem is that it is reductionist, that it bestows the credit for a particular work entirely or largely on a single person. But cinema is collaborative, moreso than possibly any other art form. Yes, a particular director provides a vision for the finished work, but there are a myriad of others involved who also leave their signatures on it. People like actors, screenwriters, cinematographers, editors, concept artists, set designers, costumers, choreographers, and on and on. All of whom must interpret the director's vision in order to create the final piece, much the same way that classical and jazz musicians interpret the works of composers to create their music.
Auteur Theory is largely an outgrowth of Great Man Theory, the idea that all of the important moments in history are the result of the actions of "great men", and ignore the numerous social and cultural forces that converge to create those moments, and lead the way out of them; without which the "great man" would never have existed or rose to prominence (even ignoring the fact that so often in history "great men" were credited for accomplishments they actually made little, if any, significant contribution to).
As an example, the extensive "making of" footage included with the extended version home video release of Peter Jackson's _The Lord of the Rings_ trilogy showcases just how many and how crucially important these various contributions are to producing the finished work. And is itself a superb example of documentary filmmaking.
I largely agree, although the only counter argument that can be made is that the director has the final say so. Even if everyone contributes, the director is the one that takes all of these elements and compiles it near the end. Their say-so is the line between an art that is published in one particular way or not at all. Maybe we can even make the argument that Hollywood has the final say so heh but idk I feel like there's an argument there.
@@dmack9646 The director is certainly an important part, and is typically (though not always) the one who has the guiding vision; but even directors don't always have the final say. Often it's the editor and/or producers who have the final say over what gets released to an audience; or worse, a "focus group" and production committee. Further, "auteurs" are not really all that common, most directors are on roughly equal footing to the rest of the major contributors, and it's the producer or writer who has the guiding vision.
Ultimately, the director is a leader, but without all the contributions of the rest of the crew, they're not going to accomplish anything.
Auteur theory can't be compared to Great Man Theory, it's a very disorienting argument and utterly wrong when we talk about the art of cinema. Auteurs are pretty much the the greatest artists of cinema (not Peter Jackson and mainstream films - can't see anyone arguing he's an auteur). The fact that there needs to be a whole crew to film a movie is part of the art of it, that's why you see different directors working in different ways and having different results. They are the ones on top of it all, that doesn't diminsh the work other people put into the film, it's just not their film. Le me put it that way, do you think Michaelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel all by himself?
ps The video doesn't say auteur theory is shallow, he's talking about an approach to the theory.
EDIT: I saw your other comment and I want to add that people that work in the confines of mainstream studio production and don't have the final say-so obviously aren't auteurs. Auteurs are people like: Cassavetes, Coppola, Scorcese, Tarkovsky, Kurosawa, Bela Tarr, Apitchatpong, Theo Angelopoulos, Godard, Truffaut, Varda, Chabrol, Mungiu, Ozu, Kiarostami and so on all over the world. They are the best of the craft and even if they work with big studios they are in charge. Don't confuse the art of cinema with the business of it.
@@MariosR38 None of those people made films on their own; they all had teams just the same as any big-budget studio blockbuster. Also, many of the directors you listed also had to work within the confines of a larger studio system, and work with producers and editors and others who had input into the production of their films.
And Auteur Theory very much originates Great Man theory; that's not even controversial. It's really weird to see someone trying to pretend it doesn't since the parallels are brutally clear.
Auteur theory isn't supposed to dismiss the work of the cast/crew. It was made in reference to journeymen directors who would go from project to project, different production companies, different cast and crew, yet in the end result there's always a signature of the director on the work. You can watch one of their films and know "this has trademarks of X director" regardless of whoever else made the film. It doesn't mean everyone else on a project isn't of value.
Yes.
Opening with explosions in the sky is in some way heartbreaking
Sometimes cinema is so hard, I have a hard time with laventura and uncle boonmee, just like make sense of the soul I guess
Is there a newsletter so I can receive emails every time there’s a new video? I’m trying to use RUclips less
Cinemacartography should read and analyze Laura Melveys' short article ''Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema''
12:53 b&w tower blocks on left - ravaged trees supported with poles , then second frame 12:56 - similar scene from different angle - scaffolding on tower block, those weird pole-supported trees again - Does anyone know the film by any chance?
Cinema is the language👍
I think that to chose to end on the Searchers.
can you made a vid about satyajit ray
What was the droning song used in the middle, I can't remember where I heard it
Silver Mount Zion ruclips.net/video/hQZfGa5t4e8/видео.html
fk i love this fking art form
When you mention auteurs, the first clips are Tarantino, who are the second clips with the dogs?
What are the films in the video?
ineffable. this is grand.
Hey! what's the name of the film, at 3:26
What is the image from at 7:24 ?
what is that song at 5:02?
Does anyone know where the thumbnail is from ?
The best video essays. Full stop. Only one note: if you're gonna pronounce the name of the magazine "Cahiers du cinéma", then learn how to pronounce it (French doesn't have an "h" sound)
❤
can you put the titles of the films in the corner when they're on screen. So many of them look interesting, but I don't know what they're called
God I love this channel
please make patron page so see what movies are featured in each video please.
could someone help ID the films at 6:22 and 6:46?
What is the clip at 2:20??
Maybe it's 'Enter the void'.
The song, please, the song that starts at the 5:00m mark. Please, what is it called? It's been so long since I've herd it. I must find it again.
I will ask myself this question for the next few weeks from now 😭
@1995Frost I’ve found it! It’s a silver mt zion - 13 angels standing guard 'round the side of your bed !
@@leageorgina you got a paypal? I'll send you five bucks. XD
@@1995Frosthaha it’s fine you’re welcome xD
this was wonderful good lord.
07:09 What's this shot from, please?
Apocalypse Now
@@eduxceleducation 🙏
0:34 what film
what’re the 2 movies 1(kid with projection woman’s face) 2(the man laying against the side as woman walks down a path of trees)
Second is the third man I think
Can you tell the title of the movie on 5:09 please? 🙏
the shot through the bars is The Passenger by Antonioni and the following shot is There Will Be Blood
I'm currently searching for it
Found it!!!
Search for this term:
"ASMZ - 13 Angels Standing Guard 'Round the Side of Your Bed"
ID of film with that ant crawling on hand? @ 7:02
Under the Skin
@@URBONED thanks/duh
Can you please do something on Jan Komasa (Suicide Room) or Francois Ozon (Summer of 85)? Please!!! I love your work so I'd love to see you discuss these. 🙏🏼🥺
love love love francois
What's the film at 0:33 ?
enter the void
@@Vuurinblik really ? the walking woman in black and white
@@phasitpolkerdpool7806 It's The Third Man
Thank you so much!
These “essays” verge upon meaningless. The romanticism around cinema towards hyperbole - be wary of “essences” … too much essentializing … towards reductionist … filmmakers, like choreographers … only reveal their limits … most films, like choreographies, are almost immediately dated and dead.
ŻUŁAWSKIII
first 🥇
why does this channel promote fascist ideas alongside this worldview? Why is d e g e n e r a c y a video on this channel? it is diametrically opposed to the sentiment of this video!
Art form, or a medium? It seems like you are hesitant to dig deep in whichever direction.
Other arts, especially visual arts, have progressed quite far in their journey into the human psyche, but not cinema. And this problem comes from the illusive limitations of cinema itself. It stems from the limit of human means of communication. It needs an external "view" which I hope might come in the near future (virtual reality and AI arts) to see how exactly where cinema lies.