Comparing Eisenstein And Vertov And Two Filmmakers And Theorists That Made Films

In cinema, lighting, blocking and panning drastically influence what an audience will notice and take away from a scene. Orson Welles’s 1941 Citizen Kane has numerous examples of effectively using these aspects within mise-en-scène, cinematography and editing to portray the importance of specific events and items in the film. The scene where Kane writes and then publishes his “Declaration of Principles” (37:42-39:42) in the New York Daily Inquirer after buying them focuses on important elements of the film, aiding the audience by combining lighting, blocking and panning to define significant roles and objects that further the movie as a whole.

Eisenstein and Vertov are two filmmakers/theorist that made films to illustrate and emphasize their film theories. One of Eisenstein’s theories is that film should have a dialectic approach to create conflict. Furthermore, he states that conflict will spark active thinking in the spectator 's mind. Another theory from Eisenstein is the methods of montage. There are five methods, but the one he highlights the most is the intellectual montage, which helps create an idea through juxtaposition to make the audience think about the film and social issues. In comparison, one of Vertov theories states that film is like a medium of movement. Furthermore, he explains the movement is required to create montage and bring shots together in harmony. Another theory from Vertov emphasizes the camera eye. He explains how the camera can show the truths of the world better than the human eye. In summary Eisenstein demonstrates his theory of conflict and intellectual montage in his films October (1928) and The Battleship Potemkin (1925). Plus, both films get the audience to think about life and society. In comparison Vertov displays his theories of movement to create montage and the importance of the camera eye in his film The Man with the Movie Camera (1929) to illustrate cinema as a whole and show the power of the camera eye. To conclude, both Eisenstein and Vertov are able to effectively display their theories in film.

Film became a storytelling and artistic medium due in large part to the introduction of editing. Although cuts in film date back to the late 1800's, editing became more sophisticated when D.W. Griffith's practices of parallel and continuity editing emphasized comprehensive structure, while Sergei Eisenstein's montage theory established the connection between shots and the emotional or intellectual response they can elicit. Purposeful editing has since become a critical component in cinematic language. In the early 1900's, Soviet filmmaker Lev Kuleshov created The Kuleshov Effect to demonstrate that an audience would assign meaning to the juxtaposition of shots. This experiment showed the importance of carefully choosing visuals and their placement. These theories of montage allowed filmmakers opportunities to “show, not tell”, a defining characteristic in the experimental film genre.

Citizen Kane, directed by Orson Welles, was an exemplary and ground-breaking work. In narrative structure and film style, Welles challenged classical Hollywood conventions and opened a path for experimentation in the later 1940s. Gregg Toland’s deep-focus cinematography and Welles’ use of low-key lighting are often discussed aspects of the movie. True, these were areas of innovation, but when watching the movie in class I was particularly struck by the use of camera movement, or “mobile framing” as described in Film Art. In this historical analysis, I will take a detailed look at how Welles and Toland use camera movement to develop and challenge the Hollywood style. By referring

One of the motifs in the film is the shots of the cameraman at work, often interwoven with the visuals “seen” by the eye of the camera. Vertov composes this film with his method called “kino-eye” that serves to “demystify film and strip away the illusion of its unmediated

Vertov and Eisenstein are each convinced that their own vision of cinema is correct. Both are extremists in their own ways. How do their visions differ? What do they have in common? How are both of their visions of cinema "revolutionary?"

In Dziga Vertov’s city symphony Man with a Movie Camera (1929), the city rises, works and spends leisure time as one united force, like a machine, each person is an integrated part of society. Through various formal techniques he creates an “organic unity”, a communist ideology that puts filmmaking at the center of social change within the spectrum of industrialization (Turvey, 144). Vertov and other artists of the time believed that, “the artist ought to be like a factory worker who manufactures socially useful objects using the tools and principles of industrial production” (Turvey, 135). Needless to say the society that Vertov lived in was idealistic in its view of a promising future. A type of modernism that trusted increases in

In the essay, he listed two categories on how film is involving and there are realistic and formative tendencies. Kracauer describes realistic tendency able to go beyond photography in two aspects. First, “they picture moments itself, not only or another of its phase”, second, “films may seize upon physical reality with all its manifold moments by means of an intermediary procedure which would seem to be less indispensable in photography – staging” (Kracauer, 294,

Eisenstein and Vertov are two filmmakers/theorists that made films to illustrate and emphasize their film theories. One of Eisenstein’s theories is that film should have a dialectic approach to create conflict. Furthermore, he states that conflict will spark active thinking in the spectator 's mind. Another theory from Eisenstein is the methods of montage. There are five methods, but the one he highlights the most is the intellectual montage, which helps create an idea through juxtaposition to make the audience think about the film and social issues. In comparison, one of Vertov’s theories states that film is like a medium of movement. Furthermore, he explains the movement is required to create montage and bring shots together in harmony. Another theory from Vertov emphasizes the camera eye. He explains how the camera can show the truths of the world better than the human eye. In summary, Eisenstein demonstrates his theory of conflict and intellectual montage in October (1928) and The Battleship Potemkin (1925). Plus, both films get the audience to think about life and society. In comparison, Vertov displays his theories of movement to create montage and the importance of the camera eye in The Man with the Movie Camera (1929) to illustrate the rhythms of everyday life and show the power of the camera eye. To conclude, both Eisenstein and Vertov are able to effectively display their theories in film.

In the study of media such as film and television, the existence of an auteur, or the media artist comes into question through the auteur theory. The auteur theory was first developed in France by the concept of Alexandre Astruc’s “camera-stylo” concept of film and later achieving recognition in America through Andrew Sarris, an American film critic. The theory holds true the belief that it is “…the director, who oversees all audio and visual elements of the motion picture, is more to be considered the ‘author’ of the movie than is the writer of the screenplay” (Benshoff, 236). Auteur Theory suggests that a director’s choice of film elements such as camera placement, lighting, choice of colors rather than the actual plot convey the message of the film. Furthermore, supporters of the auteur theory believe that the director’s work is unmistakable through his “signature style.” His signature style emphasizes his choice of recurring themes and his unique personality present throughout all of his successful films.

When comparing Ballad of a Solider directed by Grigoriy Chukhray with earlier works such as Battleship Potemkin by director Sergei M. Eisenstein and Man with a Movie Camera directed by Dziga Vertov, one should feel obligated to mention similarities in the story, theme, style and, technique, as well as their differences. Their execution of ideas as well as their artistic imprint forever changes how we view modern day cinema.

Man with a Movie Camera directed by Dziga Vertov is an unprecedented film that establishes unconventional narrative structure by abandoning standard rules of storytelling in film. Vertov utilizes cinematic elements such as editing, framing, and camera movement to weave together the story and establish an experience with the audience. All these factors culminate into establishing the idea of the connection between the city and its citizens.

Nonetheless, Eisenstein’s technique, quite similar to Kuleshov’s theory known as the ‘Kuleshov effect’, brought the power of montage to a higher level, consequently making it a efficacious tool for propaganda. Due to its immanent drama filmmakers will naturally be enticed by politics, but possibly also because the stakes

The camera plays an essential role in this film, and in a sense takes on the role of the narrator. The camera takes the audience to place where they could normally not go. Vertov seeks to create a sense of harmony between man and machine by displaying

Unlike Montage where by a combination series of short shots are edited into a sequence to condense space, time, and information, Soviet Montage on the other hand is a style of filmmaking that is evolved to immerse the audience in a story and disguise technique was turned upside down in order to create the opposite emotional effect to bring the audience to the edge of their seat, and in the case of the Odessa Steps sequence, to push the viewer towards a feeling of vertigo. In a simpler form, Soviet Montage combination series of short shots are edited into a sequence to create symbolic meaning. One main characteristic of Soviet Montage films is the downplaying of individual