“Pure Cinema” is a part of what I was thinking about in terms of cinema as art and don’t disagree Hichcock does a lot however, I still don’t care for his work because his technique alone doesn’t engage me enough to make me like his works as a whole. Doesn’t mean it’s not art just a particular artist who’s work I don’t care for regardless of it’s technical merits.
FWIW I generally consider a thing art when it evokes something more than the superficiality of the media taken literally would dictate. For example someone posted a purely CGI video a while back that I considered very artistic and liked it. OTOH, I do view Hitchcock’s work as artistic I just don’t like it because to me his devices are too contrived and the other aspects of his “story-telling” (writing, acting . . .) are not strong enough to make up for that IMO.
I can see your POV I just disagree that one must appreciate a particular “artist” to appreciate their media as an art form.
