Kristin Thompson: Neoformalism

Thompson's first chapter regarding the neoformalism approach to film analysis was intriguing and brought up interesting points about the history of the approach. I think one of the most thought-provoking aspects of reading essays about film analysis such as this one are interesting in terms of the way that film analysts think about film rather than normal audiences might. In regards to "high" versus "low" art, I feel as though most film analysts gravitate more towards films that are considered "high" art because they might be more creative, engaging, or provocative compared to the big-budget summer blockbusters that dominant the box office. This creates a disparity between the films that analysts choose to watch and the films that are the most widely seen. Of course, there is some overlap between those two categories, but in my mind, that just widens the gap between "high" and "low" culture. Thompson notes that film analysts will choose to watch films that pique their interest in some way, just as audience members select films based on their own personal preference when it comes to picking a movie to watch. That said, some of the approaches and methods that Thompson addresses in this chapter are applicable and useful for people who may not  be film analysts. Knowing the history of the neoformalist approach and the various methodologies are a good way for even the average viewer to increase their appreciation for film and "art for art's sake". I do think that there is some value, however, to challenge oneself and watch films that may not initially appeal to your tastes, just to expose your mind to new ideas and art forms while challenging preconceived notions one might have about various types of films.