The film till now : a survey of the cinema (1930)

Record Details:

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.

THE FRENCH FILM in fact, lost his sense of values when he calls The Crowd the great achievement of the American cinema. # In contrast to the cinema of the Soviets, collectivism in film production is practically unknown in France. This, it would seem is partly due to the haphazard methods of the producing companies and to the natural disinclination of the French for co-operation Nearly every film of interest which has originated from France has been the product of an individual artist-mind. This characteristic is to be found equally in the experiments of the avant-garde and in the bigger realisations of Clair, Feyder, Epstein, and Dreyer. But perhaps the basic reason for this single-mindedness is that it is the natural outcome of the painter's studio so inherent in French tradition One has but to recall the last two decades of the nineteenth century when the marble-top cafe table bred the environment in which the camaraderie of Seurat, Lautrec, Van Gogh, Gauguin, and the rest had its origin. This group habit, so typical of Parisian intellectualism, has . given rise to the cinematic artist and photogenic experimentalist personified in Duchamp, Chomette, Deslav, Gremillon, Man Ray' etc and which is so well instanced in their absolute cinematics,' LEtotle de Mer, Montparnasse, Fait Divers, A quoi revent les jeunes piles, and others. J Much has been said to the detriment of the French avant-garde film, but, on the contrary, I believe that it constitutes an excellent grounding for the young film director. We know that it is the fashion tor any young man of intelligence to borrow a few hundred francs and a camera and to make an abstract, absolute film of Paris, selling it afterwards (if he is fortunate) to an advertising firm. But this is an admirable way for that young man to develop his filmic instinct, if by any chance he should possess any. In themselves, experimental films are of little significance, being mere object-lessons in cinematic values and the various uses of the resources of the cinema Thev are a testing ground for the instruments of the film, and hence should be of the utmost interest to the big scale director. In all experimental films there are to be found a dozen uses of camera devices and trick photography which, with modifications, can be employed in the commercia film. Rene Clair's Entr'acte, made in 1923, may be cited is a typical example. It was realised from a scenario in the dadaist manner by Francis Picabia, and purported to be an exposition of 211