AUDITOIRE BEFORE, BEFORE (September 2008 - March 2009)A blog dedicated to a serious exploration of the metaphysical and aesthetic realm of Cinema via the elucidation of the visual semiotic relationships present on the films, primarily focusing on the role of film spectator to the absolute visual value of a film. ---- In essence, I TREASURE CONTEMPLATIVE NON-HOLLYWOOD FILMS, a cinema which rejects conventional narration via minimalistic usage of shots and mise-en-scene in order to create a strong connection with the audience.
AUDITOIRE BEFORE (April 2009 - March 2010)
A blog made in an attempt to capture the beauty of films by engaging on tedious "systematic research consist of posing questions [about it], reflecting on the historical factors that lead to the questions' becoming salient, broaching alternative answers, and weighing them in the light of the evidence." I am also dedicated to presenting "arguments that seek to demonstrate that some answer are better than others." This quotations, from film theorist David Brodwell, are primarily concerned with Poetics, specifically Neoformalist Poetics, which is, "while concentrating in historical context, narrative form, and cinematic style, does not exclude thematic interpretations. It absorbs them into a dynamic system --- here, one that reveals why discrete meanings can be the bait at which critics will snap, and how a clever filmmaker has set a trap for them."
Though this approach may call for general films (of different genre) i will still focus entirely on CONTEMPLATIVE CINEMA.
March to September 2010 marks the transition period. :-)
AUDITOIRE NOW (September 2010 - present)
A blog made in an attempt to capture the beauty of films as it is. And to regain the long lost history of Philippine Cinema.
A singular argument brought over a macchiato venti coffee at Razon's (i did not ate their specialty --- pancit luglug) unplugged me from my deep-seated consciousness. Two of my friends with nationalist ideals, Mike and Louise, have argued about the dead-end conditions of my intense devotion to foreign films. The sound of the word 'foreign' seems to imply an argument over the depth of dichotomy between the local and the foreign, or more appropriately, the local and the global. In film studies per se, at least in historical poetics, this dichotomy is not highly universalized or generally used as a means for discussion. However, on lower level of discourse e.g. taste preferences and interpretative modes of criticisms, the choice between foreign and local is highly important.
Central to Auditoire
Auditoire, as it continuously separate itself from me, has always been struggling with the conception of poetics-toned film criticisms. The central idea, after writing my updated blog description last April 2009:
A blog made in an attempt to capture the beauty of films by engaging on tedious "systematic research consist of posing questions [about it], reflecting on the historical factors that lead to the questions' becoming salient, broaching alternative answers, and weighing them in the light of the evidence." I am also dedicated to presenting "arguments that seek to demonstrate that some answer are better than others." This quotations, from film theorist David Brodwell, are primarily concerned with Poetics, specifically Neoformalist Poetics, which is, "while concentrating in historical context, narrative form, and cinematic style, does not exclude thematic interpretations. It absorbs them into a dynamic system --- here, one that reveals why discrete meanings can be the bait at which critics will snap, and how a clever filmmaker has set a trap for them.The whole idea of my blog, as I thought about it, is to produce criticisms of films stemming from the new discourse on film analysis, Poetics of Cinema (subdivided into analytical poetics and historical poetics) proposed by film theorist David Bordwell. Bordwell's idea, that all films are crafted by an individual, an institution, a society and a history, has greatly influenced me on both personal and ideological level.
Though this may call for general films (of different genere)..." (see above)
My initial quest is to understand the theoretical discourse of cinema poetics, in the pursuit of the its applications to film analysis. My blog is somehow the output of all of this, a conglomeration of scattered thoughts on films, its underlying theoretical frameworks and its functional relationship to my life. I have to admit, film has achieved an immortalized position in my life.
Towards Nationalistic Goals
The consequence of focusing my viewing list to Filipino films have good and bad endings. One good ending is the birth of another Filipino-themed film blog. We have, i think, four major film blogs that fit into this category: Chard's Lilok Pelikula, Oggs' Lessons From School of Inattention, Noel's Critic After Dark, and, on a larger scope, the late Alexis Tioseco's Criticine. True, Philippine cinema desperately needs a distinct and established representation on the global arena. It deserves a high degree of critical engagement similar to the studies of foreign film. True enough, Filipino films lacks polemical discussions on web and much lesser on print. The Philippine society desperately needs a monthly film journal as much as it needs a considerable amount of rational and able-minded film enthusiast who will write about and recognize films not mainly because of their taste preferences but because of its importance to the national discourse.
In a January 3 post of Noel's Critic After Dark, I have left an insignia of my desperation to the establishment of a national cinema. I said:
"...What we need now is to institutionalize a NEW NATIONAL CINEMA, the past two ones happened during the 70s (about forty years ago) and, allegedly, during the silent era (most of the film prints were destroyed by the war).On the contrary, confining myself to Filipino films alone promotes 'claustrophobic encapsulation' of ideas, rendering them static, underdeveloped. This risky environment for criticism will ultimately lead to dogmatic reasoning and racist-inclined preferences.
I hope there is a step by step guide or a "INSTITUTIONALIZE A NATIONAL CINEMA" for dummies somewhere, but as weird as it is, most of the step-by-step guides for this are found somewhere in the 'revolutionary consciousness' of our art filmmakers and local film enthusiasts. Medoza, Diaz, Martin, Martinez, Red, Red, Red, and many more.
WE NEED THIS NOEL, gosh, i miss Alexis... ;-("
I highly value eclecticism especially in the level of the playing field that I consider salient to my blog. Eclecticism promotes exposure to alternatives, therefore increasing ones knowledge on a specific object at different approaches. My intense devotion to foreign films is mainly the result of my study of Bordwell's texts. Much of his examples came from different parts of the world, from different cultural backgrounds, hence eclecticism offers a freer space for the expansion of discourses on films.
What I have always dreamt is to apply historical poetics to the study of contemporary Philippine cinema, a feat no one has ever done. The evaluation of Philippine cinema under Bordwell lens, as what he did in his book Classical Hollywood Cinema, is perhaps the greatest project a Filipino film theorist or film critic can achieve. No one has ever done it.