Films are the latest form of art as they began to become popular in the 19th Century and they exhibit a tremendous development in the technology, yet there is a popular belief that they are less important than literature and painting which exist from the archaic era. From my perspective, films have the same artistic value as writings and drawings.
Certainly literature, paintings & sculptures have a much longer history than movies. They are also deeply rooted in the culture and that makes them a priceless representation of various eras. For example, literature of each century gives us an accurate description of life in those times. Paintings and sculptures have the same value. Needless to say they are the gold mines of information for historians and anthropologists.
However, it is wrong to measure the historic and aesthetic value of an art form by the number of years it has been in existence. It is true that films are the newest form of art and entertainment. However, as like paintings and literature they also reflect the era in which they are made. They also showcase the growth of technology. What’s more films are intrinsically linked to literature and there are many film adaptations of classic literature. Another advantage that films have over other art forms is that they enjoy mass appeal. Actually, films reach a greater audience than books or other art forms. This popularity makes them a valuable form of art and a good medium for conveying socio-cultural messages. Better still, unlike a novel or a drawing; a film is a labour of love of hundreds of artists and technicians and going to the cinema is rated as the highest form of entertainment today.
To conclude, I believe that films have the same artistic value as painting and literature. One cannot gauge the value of art merely from the number of years of history, they have; nor can one consider them less valuable just because aesthetic preferences differ.
Films are the latest
form
of
art
as they began to become popular in the 19th
Century and
they exhibit a tremendous development in the technology,
yet
there is a popular belief that they are less
important
than
literature
and
painting
which exist from the archaic era. From my perspective, films have the same artistic
value
as writings and drawings.
Certainly
literature
,
paintings
& sculptures have a much longer history than movies. They are
also
deeply
rooted in the culture and that
makes
them a priceless representation of various eras.
For example
,
literature
of each century gives us an accurate description of life in those times.
Paintings
and sculptures have the same
value
. Needless to say they are the gold mines of information for historians and anthropologists.
However
, it is
wrong
to measure the historic and aesthetic
value
of an
art
form
by the number of years it has been in existence. It is true that films are the newest
form
of
art
and entertainment.
However
, as like
paintings
and
literature
they
also
reflect the era in which they
are made
. They
also
showcase the growth of technology. What’s more films are
intrinsically
linked to
literature
and there are
many
film adaptations of classic
literature
. Another advantage that films have over other
art
forms
is that they enjoy mass appeal. Actually, films reach a greater audience than books or other
art
forms
. This popularity
makes
them a valuable
form
of
art
and a
good
medium for conveying
socio-cultural
messages. Better
still
, unlike a novel or a drawing; a film is a
labour
of
love
of hundreds of artists and technicians and going to the cinema
is rated
as the highest
form
of entertainment
today
.
To conclude
, I believe that films have the same artistic
value
as
painting
and
literature
. One cannot gauge the
value
of
art
merely
from the number of years of history, they have; nor can one consider them less valuable
just
because
aesthetic preferences differ.