In evaluation of the presentation that I delivered to Kayleigh about the 'Auteur Theory', referring specifically to the brilliant director 'Stanley Kubrick', I believe that my presentation did deliver a convincing argument as to why Kubrick is an auteur, and did manage to persuade my audience to agree.
Kayleigh said in her passage of feedback that I explained the key themes and techniques used by Kubrick, such as his one point perspective techniques, practical lighting techniques, and creating psychologically challenged characters. I believe that I did achieve this, which shows evidence that my presentation was a success, as this was one of my key aims whilst creating the presentation. In addition, Kayleigh said that I argued the auteur theory well, and gave a convincing account, with the use of various examples. I'm pleased that my presentation did communicate this fairly well, as it was the main purpose of my effort to show why Kubrick is an auteur, in my opinion, and to demonstrate where you can see his signature styles being represented in his work. Therefore, I can conclude that my presentation was relatively successful from this perspective. Finally, my presentation did last throughout the allocated time of 15 minutes, with a matter of around 1 minute to spare.
However, there are a few key areas in which my presentation could have been improved, in order to make it a more comprehensive resource of information. Firstly, I didn't include enough research about the origins of the auteur theory, didn't define the theory before starting to talk about Kubrick, and didn't include any of the work or ideas of the theorists that developed the Auteur Theory originally. If I was to do the presentation again, I would definitely include some information about this, as it will give the audience a bit of background information as to what the Auteur Theory is, so they will be more likely to be understanding of the information given when I link the Auteur Theory to the work of Kubrick, or any other director for the exams, such as Orson Welles or Ridley Scott.
Furthermore, in my presentation I did not discuss why Kubrick could be viewed as not being an Auteur, which someone else in the class did do. Maybe an evaluation that really questions the strength of the auteur theory's application to Kubrick's work would have been healthily applicable, so if I were to do the presentation again, I would definitely research any issues with production that would have limited Kubrick from being a proper Auteur, and having full control and dictatorship over the way his films are made. Also, I could've looked at the ideas of people who don't believe in the Auteur theory at all, for any director, and apply their thoughts as o why Kubrick could be seen as not an Auteur, from an alternative viewpoint.
Finally, Kayleigh mentioned in her feedback that I could have potentially included a few more techniques that are applied by Kubrick. Whilst I thought I had included a good amount of them, and explained them in significant detail, rather than just list several and lack a detailed explanation for each one, Kubrick has a vast arsenal of techniques that he employs throughout his films, so if I'd researched even further, or spent more time watching and analysing more of the films in greater detail, I would've been able to add more examples. The only issue I would have faced in doing so, is in order to give proper explanations of all the techniques, themes and styles, I would need an elongated period of time, as I consumed the entire 15 minutes presenting the ideas I had already produced. Also, I believe that whilst concluding and summarising at the end of the presentation, I could've produced an additional slide that allowed me to have a reference point and make it clearer for the audience, rather than referring to the slide with Kubrick's name on it.
Therefore, in conclusion, I believe that my presentation was relatively successful, as Kayleigh, who viewed my presentation, was persuaded by my argument that Kubrick is an auteur. However, this is only a sample of one person, so I'd have to perform to a group to really test this. To improve my presentation if I were to do it again, I would include background information of the Auteur Theory for my audience to understand it better, and maybe a few more of the Auteur's techniques, as these are very interesting for an audience.
Luke Willis
No comments:
Post a Comment