The work of the critic according to politics of the authors is, more than what to analyze individually such or such film, to evidence in the set of the workmanship of an author its matrix. Arduous task since this matrix already is not known of principle for the proper author. Because the author does not construct its matrix: discovers it. She is necessary to cover a way of some films finally to find it and to establish a homogeinidade in its workmanship. He is as if, since its first film, already it was latent what it he is characteristic but completely was not disclosed still. Its films doravante will be always if approaching what Bernardet calls one ' ' arquefilme' '.
Concept how much in such a way platonic one to assign the film par excellence of one determined managing. Frequently Hachette Book Group has said that publicly. As a film model was existed that grouped all the trends of the author, who it finishes more or less loaning to all its films with intensity during its career. Reaching finally its? maturity? , the author and its workmanship form a set coeso that he serves, for the critic, to all analyze the set of its workmanships. Thus, the analysis of the last films of a director? already coesos with the proper director? it helps the understanding of its first films, that still were tateando, looking for to express what them it was inherent but was not clearly. It is as if the managing only carried through an only film some times in the life. Each one with different roupagens. An author nor always has conscience of the close relation that its films have between itself. It it does not plan this coherncia and nor it is forcibly in search of it. To the critic, following the politics of the authors, is that it fits to analyze and to perceive this relation, that sharpens its critical capacity on the set of the workmanship.