Close Up (Jul-Dec 1929)

Page scan 00060 from Close Up

Record Details:

Title:
Close Up
Date:
Jul-Dec 1929
Publisher:
[London, etc., Pool]
Volume:
Close up ... devoted to the art of films
Leaf #:
00060
Language:
English
Subjects:
motion pictures, Motion pictures -- Periodicals
Collection:
Switzerland, Early Cinema, and Global Cinema
Format:
Periodicals
Contributor:
Library of Congress, MBRS, Moving Image Section
Sponsor:
Library of Congress, Motion Picture, Broadcasting and Recorded Sound Division
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
As an active film magazine, CLOSE UP lasted only a short time, from 1927 to 1933. Yet the legacy of this English-language periodical, which was published in Switzerland, continues to matter. Edited by Bryher and her husband Kenneth Macpherson, CLOSE UP became THE magazine for energetic debates about the nature of cinema and manifestos imagining new forms of filmmaking and spectatorship. The magazine published articles by filmmakers, such as Sergei Eisenstein, and female literary modernists, such as H.D. and Gertrude Stein. As film scholar Anne Friedberg explains in the anthology CLOSE-UP, 1927-1933: CINEMA & MODERNISM, 'CLOSE UP became the model for a certain type of writing about film -- writing that was theoretically astute, politically incisive, critical of films that were simply 'entertainment.' For six and a half years, CLOSE UP maintained a forum for a broad variety of ideas about the cinema; it never advocated a single direction of development, but rather posed alternatives to existing modes of production, consumption, and film style.' Like Friedberg's own writing, CLOSE UP continues to be essential reading for anyone interested in the history of film and media theory. -- Eric Hoyt, 2014
Date Added:
June 20, 2024
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

CLOSE UP Banlield's next epic, " Lewd must be kept in quarantine until a Russian film staggers the Film Society, " Revolutionary " must be banished until Pudovkin revisits the British Isles. Yes, our critics have had a poor time lately. Their superlatives are in dry dock, awaiting the next batch of Elstree trade shows, the pretty little phrases with which they dismiss Messrs. Cavalcanti and Company must lie dormant until next season. With one or tw^o exceptions, we have not had manv British trade shows lately. The home product is feeling unwell. Rumour has it that it is busy finding its voice. One can but hope that it will die dumb. I sometimes wonder what the critics do when they have no British films to praise. Probably they begin making puns about Clara Bow. It's a life. As a warning to those of Close Up's readers who are sufficiently lucky never to have seen any British efforts, I have taken seven monumental examples of our screen art and intend to review their salient features. Chosen as fairly as possible, I really think they represent the various currents in the British School, if any or thereabouts. The discerning reader will then be able to judge that w^hile we may be excellent fellows when it comes to growing broccoli and exporting it to France, as film makers we are scarcely as distinguished. On the other hand, one would be a fool to condemn British production out of hand. Our stuff is getting better. There is no doubt about that. It may still be imitation American, but it is better imitation than it once was. And in the case 42