Hollywood Movies Compared to Other Countries' Movies Despite the fact that Hollywood films are popular all over the world, many believe that foreign films are better. Critics’ dislike of Hollywood films’ is due to the straight-line plots of the films in which nothing is left unclear, unsettling or unexplained and every shot is justified by a link to strictest cause and effect. Hollywood films are often viewed as dulling the mind. In this country people generally view films for mere entertainment. Many recent films support this stereotype of American culture.
As most Hollywood films are produced on large budgets, aspects of the film become so realistic it ... ... middle of paper ... ... are watching and remember it is being filtered to entertain and make money. Unfortunately this is not the reality we live in and the consequence of such actions is having an effect on certain historical truths. However not only is the accuracy of events being lost through the general publics laziness, but also because it reshapes the memories of veterans who come to remember the visual images of movies rather then the actual event. The accuracy of films when telling the history of an event is often times diminished in favor of telling a story which will entertain. The use of films as pedagogical tools has many benefits, however viewers must be aware additional research is needed to gain a full understanding of the event.
Due to the nature of movies, there are some large disadvantages to using film as a medium for historical portrayal. Movies tend to play up certain character traits or moments in time to further the plotline. The destructiveness and greed of certain characters in this movie, like Aguirre, was certainly exaggerated. These exaggerations often over dramatize the situation, which as a filmmaker is not necessarily a bad thing. In a historical drama, as opposed to a documentary, you have the unsung responsibility to keep the audience interested and entertained.
Underneath the hilarity of the film lies a message not just about the lengths that actors will go for an Oscar but to be your authentic self and everything will work out. The movie also exploits the stereotypical American “Celebrity “. Throughout the film they poke fun at Hollywood and the actors within Hollywood. In the film it’s hard to detect reality from fiction because of the comedic element and editing choices. Overall, when comparing the film within the film we can clearly see the difference in the acting and filming choices.
As time goes on, history has a way of getting distorted from its most truthful form. Time causes people to drift away from accuracy and become more interested in what they want to remember. Hollywood has a reputation of creating films that cater more to the average viewer, rather than the history buff. Inglorious Basterds, by Quentin Taratino, take very liberal liberty with a history story, and creates a story that will sell to the crowd. This may seem dubious, but it is often not such a bad thing.
How historically reliable could a film of such reputation be? Films and reality are defiantly two different things. Films are made to be entertaining, exciting and emotive but life, and history, just happens and would be hard to recapture for the amusement of audiences. Many extremely entertaining historical films such as Pearl Harbour, Braveheart and JFK, all Oscar winners, have many historical inaccuracies which have managed to confuse the general public that have a reasonable grasp on the stories. I think that this could be quite relevant in the reliability of Schindler’s List.
The Film Girl, Interrupted: Portrayal of Truth in Hollywood Films Most people are likely to relate Hollywood with money. If a person lives in the Hollywood area, people assume she or he is probably rich. If she or he is a Hollywood movie star, the person probably makes a lot of money. Therefore, to follow that line of thought, when Hollywood producers make a movie, they make it just for money. And some filmmakers do seem to make films only for the money the movies will earn.
For my final project, I chose to learn more about my favorite director, Martin Scorsese. From as far as I can remember, Martin Scorsese’s films have always intrigued me like no others have. There are many reasons why I am drawn to his type of films and his style of directing. Martin Scorsese has directed films that support his ethnic background. He has revolutionized the motion picture industry with the films he has directed.
The Hollywood studios were constantly trying to do their part for the war buy making films about the war in a fairy tale "Hollywood" style. Since You Went Away crossed these boundaries, and the movie audience at the time, positively responded for this reason. The producer and screenwriter of the film knew America craved this portrayal. Critics of the film from this period, applauded it's "realism", but in hindsight studies of the film in the seventies and eighties were a little more critical of the film. David O. Selznick was the man behind the vision of this film and Selznick is best known for film classic's like; Gone With the Wind, (from which the formula of this movie draws heavily from) Rebecca, and King Kong.
The "star system" was a method of developing and advancing the popularity of Hollywood movie stars. The system, which began during the height of the Hollywood studio system era, emphasized the image of the actor instead on the actual acting. The movie studio's profits were driven by the popularity of the stars that appeared in their films. According to Rocco, the stars had long term contracts with the movie studios that paid them a weekly salary, and the stars were identified with specific types of characters that would often be repeated in many movies. Belton stated that "the star provides the studio with a tangible attraction, an image that can be advertized and marketed, offsetting the less tangible qualities of the story, directing, acting, art direction, costume design, and overall studio style" (89).