Technology is a double-edged sword when it comes to filmmaking. Special effects bring fantasy to life, such as the CGI and movement capture technology that brought Gollum into being and created the world of Avatar. Used indiscriminately, however, technology can also cheapen movies as a visual and narrative experience.
3-D often gets treated as a moneymaking gimmick rather than an artistic tool. The larger-than-life experience of going to a movie theater gets lost when you can watch the Titanic sink right on your iPhone.
Two films generating Oscar buzz this year, “The Artist” and “Hugo,” make use of modern technology and perspectives to look back at early forms of filmmaking.
Although nostalgic attitudes risk becoming over-sentimental, these films raise questions about the place that films hold today. As movie technology grows bigger and better, “Hugo” and “The Artist” work to anchor our conception of movies with historical context and an appreciation for filmmaking at its purest. They take us back in time, reminding us why it’s important to reflect on what movies really mean to us.
“The Artist” simultaneously demonstrates how far film technology has come and makes the argument that these advancements aren’t essential to compelling filmmaking. Filmed in black and white and almost complete silence, “The Artist” depicts a love story that takes place during the transition from silent films to talkies that took place in the late 1920s and early 1930s.
The movie purposefully makes fun of the corny technique used in silent films, but despite the film’s satiric side, the love story is engaging and uplifting.
Director Michael Hazanavicius said of his film, “There’s something about a pure love story, like in the old days… there’s no cynicism in this love story and (people) love when there’s no cynicism. They want to believe.”
The very simplicity of the antiquated technology appeals to our inner child and allows the film’s creativity, heart and wit to come to the forefront.
Meanwhile, the story that plays out in “Hugo” emphasizes the integral relationship between machinery and art.
The film honors George Melies, one of the first pioneers in filmmaking who produced hundreds of movies filled with the fantastic and supernatural.
In “Hugo,” Melies explains his innovations in film special effects, which included relying on illusions and tricks he used during his days working as a magician and painting the film by hand to achieve color picture.
Melies says of his film studio, “If you ever wonder where your dreams come from, look around: this is where they’re made.” The story takes place against the backdrop of Martin Scorcese’s own skillful exemplar of technique subsumed in creative vision. His apt use of 3-D and captivating visuals enthrall and transport the audience along the narrative of Hugo’s journey.
We often take film for granted. Many filmmakers still don’t have a handle on 3-D, leading to never-ending installments of Shrek and the re-release of movies in 3-D to eke out more profit.
The fact that we can stream and download whenever and wherever does damage to the sense of wonder that films used to create.
“The Artist” and “Hugo” work to counteract this degenerating movement in film, emphasizing a need for appreciation for film in its purest form and bringing to light the potential it has to take us on a journey and make us believe.
Natalie Friedman is a Weinberg senior. She can be reached at [email protected].
