In order to discuss how modernist and avant-garde filmmakers have opposed Hollywoods dominant mode of representation, one must first attempt to define what this dominant mode of representaion is. To do this we look at the Classical Hollywood Narrative structure which was dominant between 1915 and 1960. In This we will usually have one or two protagonists. The desire or needs held by such protaganists is what catylizes the story. Conflict must be created to oppose the achievement of aforementioned desire. This will usually present itself in the form of an antagonistic person or group of people. Clasically there is also a cause and effect structure. For Example:.
A causes B(effect) .
B causes C(effect).
C causes D (effect) .
And so on.
This is a highly effective style because it optimises the viewers understanding of a movie and in many cases it will cause them to know what is going to happen before it happens. Finally one of the most widespread idiosychrocies of this classical Hollywood structure is Closure. A film of this type must end in a place where all loose ends are tied up and the viewer knows who wins , who loses and perhaps it may be implied the the main protagonist will go on to live a long and prosperous life. .
Aesthetically there is also some continuity in the world of the classical narrative structure. The use of three point lighting (key, fill and back lights) is predominant. When it comes to editing the use of continuity editing or invisible editing is favoured for in this representation the viewer should not be aware of the camera. Also towards this end rules of photography must be adhered to such as the 180 degree rule (crossing the line) and eyeline match etc.
So with this as the basis how did modernist and avant garde filmmakers oppose this structure with there own. Well I will start with the Italian Neo Realist movement to illustrate the differences.