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.
THE AIM OF THE FILM
It is fairly apparent that a distinction can be made between the methods of expression employed by different directors. For example, it would not be difficult to distinguish between a film made by Lubitsch and a film made by Pabst, although the theme in both films was identical. It would simply be the matter of a distinction between methods of approach. Further, we know that Eisenstein constructs his films by a process of impulsive editing (based on complex forethought), according to his judgement of the material as being expressive of his principles of tonal and over-tonal montage. That is to say, we acknowledge that he selects his shots and determines their screen-length by the physiological-psychological sensations gained from their visual qualities and not (as does Dziga-Vertov) by a purely metric process of the number of frames to a shot. These are merely niceties of expression which are capable of being appreciated by every intelligent observer who is familiar with the principles of filmic representation.
But when we see and hear a film, or rather when we accept a film, we are conscious of something beyond its theme and technical expression. We become aware of the director. Our acceptance of the director's creative impulse, however, is governed by our degree of sensitivity, for we may or we may not be receptive to his inner urge of expression. We are possibly going to achieve contact with his creative impulse, whereby we shall appreciate his work to the fullest extent, or we are possibly only going to accept his theme by the simple technical methods adopted by him. In this way, we must distinguish between, on the one hand, a theme and its filmic expression and, on the other, the creative impulse of a director. It is one thing to accept The End of St. Petersburg and Ten Days that Shook the World as themes and examples of film technique, but quite another to accept through them the creative mentalities of Pudovkin and Eisenstein.
In this respect, therefore, it is clear that we are concerned not with the collective acceptance of a film by a number of persons, which is a matter of technical expression, but with
337 22