Q1: MacCabe and Caldwell both analyze film authorship as a collective process ad a collaborative effort, but this does not mean that their ideas are interchangeable. Compare and contrast one key difference and one point of significant overlap between MacCabe and Caldwell’s theories.
Film authorship is a fascinating topic for discussion because it had an enormous influence on the development of the industry. MacCabe and Caldwell propose similar film authorship theories that highlight the importance of collaborative efforts but propose different explanations of the role of a director.
The similarity between the theories proposed by MacCabe and Caldwell is that both authors recognize that film authorship is a process that requires collective
…show more content…
Application of the auteur theory in film criticism has been controversial because both supporters and opponents of the theory provide reasonable arguments. Nevertheless, it has to be recognized that some of the professions have focused on the identification of distinctions between auteurs and regular directors. The primary argument is that the articles written by Kael and de Valck suggest that movie critics and festival programmers should consider different factors when determining whether a particular director is auteurs or …show more content…
She believes that an outstanding film critic has to demonstrate flexible thinking, and restrictions imposed by the theory have an adverse effect on judgment. The author argues that it is a responsibility of a critic is to expand an understanding of particular work based on subjective feelings and passion. Hence, an ideal auteur according to the auteur theory may not be described as a universal category. Kael recognizes that there is a difference between auteurs and regular directors. She criticizes Hitchcock by arguing that "his methods and approach are not those of an artist but a prestigiator" (Kael 15). Nevertheless, prominent film critics continue to regard him as an outstanding auteur. On the other hand, de Valck argues that festival programmers have a responsibility to select auteurs based on strict criteria. The author argues that it is imperative to recognize the role of commitment to artistic interest. De Valck notes that "it is the prizes and recognition that confirm the status of these filmmakers" when discussing auteurs (78). Differently put, he believes that material success is not an important factor when it comes to the determination whether a particular director is auteurs or