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.

I CAN SEE THAT I CANNOT SEE 75 has no involuntary and unconscious elements. If someone wants to tell a lie and is a capable liar, his words will serve him almost to perfection. But his face has areas over which he has no control. He may knit his brows and wrinkle his forehead as much as he likes, the camera creeps up quite close and shows that his chin, which has no dirigible mimicry, is weak and frightened for all the bravado of the rest of the face. In vain does his mouth smile ever so sweetly — the lobe of his ear, the side of a nostril shown in isolated magnification reveal the hidden coarseness and cruelty. In one of Eisenstein's films there is a priest, a handsome, fine figure of a man. His noble features, his inspired eyes are made even more radiant by a glorious voice. He is like the sublime image of a saint. But then the camera gives an isolated big close-up of one eye; and a cunningly watchful furtive glance slinks out from under his beautiful silky eyelashes like an ugly caterpillar out of a delicate flower. Then the handsome priest turns his head and a close-up shows the back of his head and the lobe of his ear from behind. And we see the ruthless, vicious selfishness of a coarse peasant expressed in them. This expression of the nape of the neck and ear-lobe is so incisive, so irresistibly convincing and so disgusting that when the noble face reappears, it is like a deceptive screen concealing a dangerous enemy. The expression of the whole face cannot cover up the expression of its details, if these details betray a different, more profound truth. Graphology claims to read the writer's true character from the handwriting even if what is written down is an untruth, but the ability to read handwriting in this way is a very rare gift. The art of reading faces was about to become the very useful property of the masses, thanks to the silent film. I CAN SEE THAT I CANNOT SEE In the early days of the silent film 'microphysiognomics' had already shown that one can read more in a close-up of a face than what is visibly written on it. On a face, too, one can read 'between the lines'. The Japanese actor Sessue Hayakawa was a film star of