FILM AS AN ART FORM

 When is Film Art? .But what marks the boundary? When is film art? Some might restrict the label to avant garde cinema, European art house films, and video installations, while others are inclined to expand the category to include films intended for wide audiences.Some have even suggested that the art/non-art boundary does not exist. All film is art, though some of it is better art or higher art. How, if at all, should be draw the line? This, it turns out, is not just a question for those with a special interest in film. It has interest for aesthetic theory more broadly, because film can serve as a test case for definitions of art. Some theories of art seem too restrictive, because they prevent us from classifying certain films that are aesthetic masterpieces into the category of art. In the early days of cinema, it was sometimes suggested that film is never art. Film is, at best, a photographic record of an artistic performance, but not an art form in it‘s own right. This view, echoing similarly dismissive attitudes towards photography, was difficult to sustain. After all, film is much more that a recording. The camera is no innocent eye. Filmmakers need to make numerous choices about every shot, and, of course, film production involves editing, and editing typically results in a final product that is quite different from what an eyewitness to the filmed events would or could see. These days it is hard to find anyone who would seriously defend the claim that film in never art. More typical is the opposite view that all or most film is art.. films produced for mass consumption, including television sitcoms, quality as art. films have genres and forms that are descended from genres and forms of works that are uncontroversially considered works of art. Second, the creators of sitcoms and other popular works engage in activities characteristic of artistic practice: writing, acting, choice of shooting styles, and so on. Third, such words would count as art according to leading accounts of the nature of art.. Consider, for example, the genre comedy. The question, ―Are comedies always art?‖, seems to be as unsettled, as the question, ―Is film always art?‖ Indeed, both questions are unsettled for similar reasons. All comedies clearly share certain things in common, but are those things sufficient for being artworks . Is the use of actors and the choice of camera angles sufficient for counting as an artwork? The answer is far from obvious, and it seems to be precisely what is under debate . most films satisfy the conditions laid out in prevailing classificatory theories of art. A work of art is an artifact of a kind created to be presented to artworld public