ABSTRACT
I noted in the last chapter that ideally an actor should be one aspect of a film’s mise-en-scène and tested out the notion that an actor may perform best when under the guide of a strong director. Unlike television, where the “show runner,” the person in charge of script and production, has creative control, in theatrical film the director is the main driving force, arguably the most creative individual in the filmmaking process. At the very least, the director shares with the film’s producers the overall control of the production. At best, the director is the imaginative engine of the film, imprinting it with a coherent look and feel; he or she transfers the inert words of the script into the (hopefully) dynamic visuals on the screen and shapes performances from the bits and pieces of acting that are often filmed out of sequence. As we will see, the director’s role has been a contentious one, both in the making and in the critical analysis of film, and before we discuss the work of a few individual directors, we need to examine some of this history.
