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.
PREFACE
Nobody can tell any one else how to accept a film. And, because a film should be the result of a director's outlook on life and an expression of what he sees therein, it is obvious that rules and regulations cannot be laid down as to how a film should be made. That is not the aim of this book. We can, however, criticise a director's methods of expression; his conception and his use of technical devices peculiar to the cinema.
Criticism of films is as difficult as criticism of music. To describe adequately the emotions aroused by Pudovkin or Pabst is as impossible as description of the feelings evoked by Mozart or Wagner. In fact, I am tempted to quote that, like poetry, film criticism is 'emotion remembered in tranquillity. '
Throughout this book I have endeavoured to draw a clear distinction between a film and a movie. At the same time I have remembered that it is perfectly possible to admire the best in The Love Parade and to be affected deeply by the drama of The General Line. But whereas the former picture produces no effect after its time of showing, the latter leaves a profound impression on the mind, giving rise to certain ideas and starting trains of thought of lasting value. Unfortunately, the general public is always more inclined to applaud the appearance of merit in a film than the merit itself.
In short, therefore, I am concerned in these pages primarily with the film as a film; as a valuable medium of dramatic expression rather than as a superficial entertainment; as a mental stimulant rather than as an amusement.
The theories and reactions set down in this survey are the natural outcome of a period of some years devoted to the close observation of films and film production. They have been instigated by time spent in public cinemas, in private projection rooms, and by experience of studio work. I have thought fit to divide the result of my observations into two parts, the Actual and the Theoretical, each being dependent on the other for support. Firstly, I have put on record
9