McCartney and Ray Davies, Bowie are some who they will be talking about in 100 years. Michael Jackson? I don’t think so. Way too ephemeral.
For (pop) musical work coming out today? Hard to say since we’ve already forgotten great artists of the last 30 years, who are past their prime. I hope that Robin Pecknold of the Fleet Foxes grows and makes great work.
But we are forgetting great music faster than it is being made, and we are stealing it too, when we find it. Doesn’t look good.
My kids are 10 and 11 and can each name many Michael Jackson songs. My oldest can do the “Thriller” dance, a dance created 20 years before she was born. I doubt they know who David Bowie is.
I love Bowie and like his music as much if not more than Michael, but Jackson is one of the most important and memorable artists in pop/rock history, and will be remembered for many decades to come.
I am just thinking to myself : When he was your kids age he was an absolute powerhouse.
I’d find it depressing if he was top of the heap in recognition terms for his adult work. But in aesthetic terms I can’t see it.
Your kids don’t know everyone who was a great auteur I assume? Truffaut, Fellini? Rabelais, Mark Twain? DW Griffith? They can’t be the judge, can they?
Very small kids love Barney a lot. What would make one say that Barneys creator was an auteur?
BTW: Who was it that bought the Beatles catalogue?
Anyway, I don’t agree with your first statement - Jackson was a legitimate artistic force and a game-changing one, at that. Nor do I understand your second. What do movie directors have to do with what pop music is going to last?
The point being, kids today know who Michael Jackson was. That is just one yardstick, but it’s an interesting one. I’ll take bets right now; 40 years from now, Jackson will be remembered as a landmark artist in the history of popular music.
That’s a good question and partly written that way because it leaves it open to your interpretation. It’s really all shades of gray unless there is a truly an occurrence that creates a definitive shift or trend.
So, as to specifically answering your question, I’m thinking the last 20 years. Or Auteurs still pumping out movies with some degree of regularity that also falls within that span of time.
If the question were a way of asking if Woody Allen should be considered this era, my first impression was that it should be a no and I that think of him as a filmmaker of the 70’s & 80’s. His heyday, so to speak. That said, I’m confusing his greatest/best with whether he was just being productive. He’s made at least one movie every year in this millennium, so yes, he’s obviously a filmmaker of this era, even though I would not say his best material is from what I would consider this era – YMMV, clearly. (Full disclosure, I think his best movie is Bullets Over Broadway and that Midnight in Paris was wildly overrated.)
If I’m considering where this era started and stopped, taking into consideration the grayness of such a concept, mid-90’s seems to an era where movies changed. 3D animation started with Toy Story (1995) and there was a greater lean toward effects-driven movies because of the advancement of CGI, etc (Jurassic Park 1993). Of course, those are not the kinds of movies Auteurs make. However, PTA’s first written/directed movie was in 1997, Wes Anderson’s and David O. Russell’s in 1994. So, there seemed to be a bit of a shift there.
But again, it’s a question that begs to be open to one’s own interpretation.
Well, Auteur comes from film criticism. But the thread expanded it I think.
The OP is not which music is going to last but who are Auteurs who will be remembered in 100 years. What is your working distinction between Auteur and author?
I love Michael Jackson, with his brothers. I don’t think he will matter in 50 years. (40 is too real for me)
I think I’m with RickJay - the rest of the Jacksons will be footnotes, including one time mega-seller Janet. But Michael will probably endure and I say that as someone who has largely not been much of a fan ( honestly I probably most like the old Jackson 5 singles of any of his stuff ). If anything I think he might have a nostalgic revival decades from now as memories of his numerous shady/weird eccentricities fade.
We’ll just have to check back in 50 years ;).
Meanwhile, back on topic - anyone care to champion Luc Besson :p? Anyone? Anyone?
You have to give him some credit, his movies aren’t like anyone else’s.
[QUOTE=Moonchild]
3D animation started with Toy Story (1995) and there was a greater lean toward effects-driven movies because of the advancement of CGI, etc (Jurassic Park 1993). Of course, those are not the kinds of movies Auteurs make. However, PTA’s first written/directed movie was in 1997, Wes Anderson’s and David O. Russell’s in 1994. So, there seemed to be a bit of a shift there.
[/QUOTE]
It may simply be that we aren’t smart enough yet to recognize John Lasseter and Brad Bird as the brilliant artists they are.
I think there is something to the notion, however, that something about movies change circa 1992-1995. It was in that era that you not only had the CGI movie revolution and animation revolution, but had Pulp Fiction and how that changed cinema and made the indie film mainstream. There seemed to be an explosion in film experimentation and a willingness to get people like Paul Thomas Anderson get some attention.
Perhaps that’s on the decline as the theatres are utterly besieged by comic books films and more creative talent is running to TV, I don’t know. But things definitely changed then.
I agree. An auteur isn’t somebody who had a memorable career. An auteur is somebody who participates in a collaborative work but imposes his own style on it.
There’s no point in calling a novelist or a painter an auteur. Their work is always produced by a single person. And it seems to be stretching the point to call a singer an auteur; it seems pretty obvious to say that any song sung by Michael Jackson is going to be seen as a Michael Jackson song.
So auteur theory is mostly applied to films. It’s a relevant point to say that one individual was able to impose his style on a work that involved dozens of people.
It’s also worth noting that not every director is an auteur and not every auteur is a director. Somebody like Tim Burton, for example, can set his style on a movie as a producer. The Nightmare Before Christmas is seen as a Tim Burton movie even though Henry Selick directed it.
Nothing really. He’s just not a fast director. He makes an average of one movie every three years.
Fear, Anxiety & Depression (1989)
Welcome to the Dollhouse (1995)
Happiness (1998)
Storytelling (2001)
Palindromes (2004)
Life During Wartime (2009)
Dark Horse (2012)
Wiener-Dog (scheduled for 2016)
I don’t consider Lasseter and Bird (or Cameron and Spielberg, for that matter) as Auteurs and maybe in some senses my thinking is wrong. And it ain’t because I’m not a fan: Toy Story is in my Top 10, (maybe even Top 5) and so is Finding Little Nemo.
I think of Auteurs as independent-leaning filmmakers who tend to write their own work, lean heavily on character and are less impacted by studio decision-making. Thus, creating their own visions. Lasseter was a remarkable overseer of a production (talking about Toy Story) that required many smart and talented minds and many of his choices were the result of others’ input. In fact, the studio’s success is/was due in large part to the wisdom of story editor Joe Ranff, as much as it was to Lasseter himself. (Ranff was killed in a car crash during pre-production/scouting of Cars.)
OK. I loved Dollhouse and Happiness. I haven’t been able to retain the couple others I’ve seen in mind. He was my great weird hope, and I wanted a big deal from him. I hope I’m wrong. I don’t think I’ve seen the last two. He doesn’t have a lot of $ behind him or doesn’t like interviews because I don’t see him around.
Soderbergh is responsible for Oceans Thirteen. Ewwww. I’d agree with a poster above that his films have no signature stamp/feel/look/whatever that makes them recognizably his. A couple names I’ll add are Christopher Nolan and Lars Von Trier, the latter of whose films I’ve yet to see.