Many people believe that film is a less important art than other forms such as literature and painting. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many people argue that the

art

of making films should be regarded as less important compared to other forms of

art

, namely

literature

and painting. From my perspective, every form of

art

has its unique features and incomparable to others.

Thus I

Accept comma addition

Thus, I

would like to believe films are not of secondary importance. On the one hand,

art

does not have any distinctive characteristics to measure it, or compare one form of it to another. So it makes nearly impossible to make judgements and put

literature

or painting superior to film-shooting.

On the other hand

, each of these 3 concepts uses different elements to influence audiences. With the

literature

- it is a language, with films- visual and auditory cues as well as with painting only visual signs.

This

, in turn, again proves the statement about the impossibility of comparing one form of

art

to another, as they use different elements and are distinctive. The other point is that these branches of

art

are closely related to each other.

In other words

, the building blocks of

literature

are words, for painting -the images, whereas film is in itself a combination of linguistic and visual elements, or the point between the two above.

Thus

, it would not be reasonable to look up on the

literature

and neglects films, as the two are inseparable parts of the whole concept of

art

. To conclude, the fact that all of the three concepts use different elements and are tightly clashed with each other makes it impossible to compare them.

Hence

, every of them is unique on its own and should be regarded equally, or based on personal preferences.