SCREEN-L Archives

October 1994


Options: Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Randy Riddle <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Film and TV Studies Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Fri, 21 Oct 1994 09:05:22 -0400
text/plain (22 lines)
On Thu, 20 Oct 1994, Patrick B Bjork wrote:
> Pardon me for asking but could you define the phrase "truly important
> filmmakers?" Or at least provide some descriptors to identify the truly
> important filmmaker. I ask because _Citizen Kane_, if I'm not
> mistaken, was also directed by an "untried and inexperienced" filmmaker
> which *over a relatively lengthy period of time* has been elevated to
> canonical status. Is it not inconceiveable that such could be the case
> with PF?
I'm sorry Patrick, but are you discounting Welles extensive stage and
radio experience from his preparation for making films?
It seems to me that many filmmakers of the past (Welles, Sturges,
Coppola, etc) had a more more well-rounded liberal arts education, often with
more knowledge of classic literature, theater, music, or film
history itself, than alot of the young filmmakers I'm seeing today.
Randy A. Riddle
[log in to unmask]