This review of the major studios ob

This review of the major studios obviously leads to crucial question : What difference did it make that the films were producted by an industry and not by a man with a chisel or palette?
In some ways this is an unfair question, since a motion picture by its very nature is a Collaborative enterprise. Even D. W. Griffth, one of the most single-minded and highly personal directors, relied upon others for advice and help, especially his talented cameraman G. W. “Billy” Bitzer. Indeed, Lillian Gish, in referring to Griffith in his declining years, said:
There was no one left among his staff to say “no” once in awhile. He needed the gently abrasive minds and personalities of those who had once been close to him. He had thrived on the tactful suggestion, the quiet hint that some other director had done as well,that a better effect could be found.
This comment can be made about almost every artist who had work in films. This does not deny the talents and insight of highly talented craftsmen; it only illustrates the very nature of the film medium, especially in the feature film. Collaboration is more than a necessary evil; it is a vital factor contributing to the overall excellence of most motion pictures.
More than 75,000 feature films were produced between 1930 and 1946. Most of them were characterized by the traits of the studios that produced them. However, some of them stand out because a creative, talented director was allowed to place his personal signature on the film. Indeed, as John Baxter has pointed out in Hollywood in the Thirties:
Although the high average standard of the Hollywood films during the thirties is directly attributable to the studio system with it pools of talent and techniques, most of the period’s major advances in cinema art can be traced to a group of independent producers whose unwillingness to work within the studio system gave them a greater degree of freedom than would have been possible other-wise.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 2:

This review of the Major Studios obviously Leads to CRUCIAL question: What difference did it Make that the Films were producted by an Industry and not by a Man ​​with a Chisel or Palette?
In Some Ways this is an Unfair question, since a Motion Picture by. its very nature is a Collaborative enterprise. Even DW Griffth, one of the most single-minded and highly personal directors, relied upon others for advice and help, especially his talented cameraman GW "Billy" Bitzer. Indeed, Lillian Gish, in referring to Griffith in his declining years, said:
There was no one left among his staff to Say "no" once in Awhile. He needed the gently abrasive minds and personalities of those who had once been close to him. He had thrived on the Tactful Suggestion, quiet hint that the Director had done as well Some Other, that could be a better Effect Found.
This comment Can be Made About Almost every had Artist Who Work in Films. This does not deny the talents and insight of highly talented craftsmen; Only illustrates the very nature of the film medium, especially in the feature film. Collaboration is more than a necessary evil; it is a factor Vital Contributing to the overall Excellence Most of Motion pictures.
More than 75,000 Feature Films were produced between 1930th and 1946. Most of them were characterized by the traits of the Studios that produced them. However, some of them stand out because a creative, talented director was allowed to place his personal signature on the film. Indeed, as John Baxter has Pointed out in Hollywood in the Thirties:
Although the High average standard of the Hollywood Films during the thirties is directly attributable to the Studio System with it Pools of Talent and Techniques, Most of the period's Major Advances in Cinema Art. can be traced to a group of independent producers whose unwillingness to work within the studio system gave them a greater degree of freedom than would have been possible other-wise.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 3:

This review of the major studios obviously leads to crucial question: What difference did it make that the films were. Producted by an industry and not by a man with a chisel or palette?
In some ways this is an, unfair question since a motion. Picture by its very nature is a Collaborative enterprise. Even D. W. Griffth one of, the most single-minded and highly personal. Directors.Relied upon others for advice, and help especially his talented cameraman G. W. "Billy." Bitzer. Indeed Lillian Gish in,,, Referring to Griffith in his, declining years said:
There was no one left among his staff to say "no once in awhile. He." Needed the gently abrasive minds and personalities of those who had once been close to him. He had thrived on the tactful. Suggestion.The quiet hint that some other director had done, as well that a better effect could be found.
This comment can be made. About almost every artist who had work in films. This does not deny the talents and insight of highly talented craftsmen;? It only illustrates the very nature of the, film medium especially in the feature film. Collaboration is more than a necessary. Evil;It is a vital factor contributing to the overall excellence of most motion pictures.
More, than 75 000 feature films were. Produced between 1930 and 1946. Most of them were characterized by the traits of the studios that produced them, However,. Some of them stand out because, a creative talented director was allowed to place his personal signature on the, Indeed film.As John Baxter has pointed out in Hollywood in the Thirties:
Although the high average standard of the Hollywood films. During the thirties is directly attributable to the studio system with it pools of talent, and techniquesMost of the period 's major advances in cinema art can be traced to a group of independent producers whose unwillingness. To work within the studio system gave them a greater degree of freedom than would have been possible other-wise.
.