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.
Unity makes any form of creative cooperation possible — not only between a director and an actor, but between a director and a composer and, particularly, between a cameraman and a director. This applies primarily to the cinema, where all these problems acquire particular significance and acuteness. Cooperation exists in every collective where there is unity of style.
When, then, is a "conflict" justified? When can the director behave like a "tyrant"? First, when a member of the collective does not fully perceive the importance of stylistic requirements. For, dictatorship, etc., apart, it is the director who is responsible for the organic unity of style of the film. That is his function and in this sense he is a unifier. Stylistic unity can and should be achieved by the whole collective, and in this respect the legitimate theatre has an advantage in that the participants work together and mature as they rehearse a play. Individuals merge with the whole conception of the play.
Work on motion pictures is much more difficult. Here, once an action is fixed on celluloid, it remains there; with visions being strictly numbered in a script, without the "revelations" of a dress rehearsal, work is more complicated and the actor's participation and appearance in the film are restricted to a greater degree. Perhaps the most difficult thing here for an actor is to harmonize his own solution with the style of the specifically cinema elements, and it is not always that he understands and grasps them all. The compositional line of, say, shots and montage should obviously be in the same key with the rest of the elements, and the various modes of music, shades in the characterization, structure of shots, and montage constructions are not always in keeping with one another. Hence, none of the elements which are combined creatively is free; none of them can fall out of the key, or bedlam will be the result. And then take the specific nature of work in the motion pictures. For instance, unlike a stage actor whose creative participation in, or at least presence at, all the phases of the rehearsal is not only desirable but obligatory, a screen player cannot visualize the entire shooting process of a picture.
A cinema actor must, therefore, be endowed with extra-sharp intuition as regards the style and the key of the film as a whole. The actor's own treatment, stylistically foreign to the whole, must interfere with the general conception as little as possible. For the general conception provides one style and one key to the compositional
8—622 113