Theory of the film : (character and growth of a new art) (1952)

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.

68 THE FACE OF MAN SPEECH AND FACIAL EXPRESSION In the silent film the actor spoke, just as he does in the talkie. But in the close-ups of the silent film we saw the actor talking and this, too, was expressive play of features. Those who can see a speaker as they listen to what he says, see and hear something different from those who only hear. In the silent film the way in which an actor moved his mouth in speaking was also a means of facial expression. That is why we all understood the actors of all nationalities so well. We understood what was meant when a man hissed his words from between clenched teeth, or spat them out like the darting tongue of a poisonous snake. This was acting, in the true sense of the word. We knew what it meant when a drunk pushed out his words with a heavy tongue through slack lips. We understood when the hero let the words drop contemptuously from the corner of his mouth. This was one of the most interesting features of the close-up, for there were a thousand different ways of speaking when the words were only seen, but not heard, by the audience. SPEECH IN THE SOUND FILM The actor in the silent film spoke in a way intelligible to the eyes, not the ears. He could do this precisely because he had no need to speak in a manner intelligible to the ear, he had no need to shape his mouth for the proper pronunciation of sounds, to open his mouth for a broad 'a' or purse it for a 'u\ The reason for any movement of the mouth was only to express some emotion — it was not a rational gesture conforming to the requirements of articulate intelligible speech. This art of expression was virtually killed by the talkie, because a mouth that speaks intelligibly to the ear, can no longer remain intelligible to the eye. It is no longer a spontaneous vehicle of expression, like the other features of the face — it has become a sound-producing instrument. It is for this reason that the sound film avoids as much as possible the showing in close-up of human faces in the act of speaking, for at such times a part of the face, to wit the mouth,