Cinema History?

sonnyboo

sonnyboo

How important is knowing any kind of cinema history? I don't feel it's necessary, but I do feel strongly that I benefit greatly by comprehending the importance of contributions by Edwin S. Porter, D.W. Griffith, Orson Welles, etc.

The French New Wave movement came from film critics, who deeply understood what was done before them and they pioneered a film movement by taking what was done before and turning it sideways. They had a deep understanding of what was done in the past and re-wrote the book. None of them were ignorant of what was the norm and the standards.

The American film renaissance of the late 1960's starting with Easy Rider opened the door for people like Martin Scorsese, Francis Coppola, Spielberg, etc. and shaped films into a new age of "realistic" portrayals. Large sets were replaced by all location shooting and method acting.

The benefit of knowing cinema history is understanding it's impact on the audience. Having the ideas of what have worked for over 100 years to effect a viewer is like having a rubber band versus a shot gun.

What do you think? How important is cinema history to YOU?
 
Extremely important. Cinema is a language, and the more history and tools of this language one understands is at least somewhat proportional to their skills as a cinematic storyteller. Even if you reject something from film history and want to move in another direction it only helps to know what you are rejecting.

This is not to say "I know a ton about film history, so naturally I'm a great filmmaker."

I think one of the problems with a lot of films today is too much inbreeding...when one lists their influences and they all happen to be films from the last five years, how much can one truly know about their language?
 
You don't have to know the director, actors, DP, etc. of every Oscar nominee for the last 80 years. The real (reel! lol) history you need to know are how techniques and styles evolved. There are thousands of little tips and tricks that have been used ever since filmmaking began. Others have evolved as technology evolved.

Why are there sound stages? They were originally built to be huge, quiet recording studios where films could be shot.

Foley is still performed in exactly the same way it was 65 years ago, but all of the technological tools have changed and Foley has grown to encompass much more than footsteps, punches and body falls. The reason it is called "Foley" is to honor of Jack Foley who codified the process and set up the first dedicated Foley recording facility.

There are even some fun anecdotes. According to legend, German director Ernst Lubitsch wanted to shoot some scenes without sound, but in his heavy German accent it came out "Mit out sound", and so this was noted as a joke on the production reports and the camera slates for the shots. The term "MOS", denoting filming without recording audio, still carries over to this day.

Just reading about the history of your craft can give you creative ideas as well as an appreciation of how far the art of filmmaking has come.

Obviously my knowledge is very sound based - that's what I do. But the knowledge of sound-for-picture history allows me to use "old" techniques to create and/or manipulate sounds when I don't have the high-tech toys I lust for.
 
I suppose it depends on your goal. If you want to make a commercially successful film, knowing what works and what doesn't (historically, commercially) would be of great benefit. If you are looking to explore and represent your creative artistry, then knowing the history may get in the way...but maybe not. By "get in the way," I mean -- the more exposure to and understanding of film history you have, the more likely it is to (unconsciously ?) creep into your own productive efforts. for good or bad -- the work becomes less of your own and more of what's already been done. I think it would take tremendous discipline to study all aspects of film history, and then avoid them all if your intent is to create something entirely new.

I may change my mind tomorrow. I'm not 100% sure about this...
 
I may change my mind tomorrow. I'm not 100% sure about this...
Click to expand...

This is why this discussion is one I never tire of listening to/participating in. After I wrote my screed I was reminded of the excellent book of interviews with sound designer/film editor Walter Murch (Apocalypse Now, The Godfather pt. II, The English Patient, American Grafitti, and he also directed Return to Oz) called "The Conversations: Walter Murch and the Art of Editing Film." The interviewer is fond of bringing up other films from history and Murch's reply is usually "I haven't seen it...I've never really watched many films." So here is an artist participating in the creation of some of the most important films in history, probably a genius, and not much of a film buff.

Curioser and curioser...
 
always a good idea to learn as much as possible about the history of any subject you plan to work with. plus film history is actually quite interesting!! and it does help you understand the trends of the art.
 
It's always good to know if you can.

But it wont stop you from becoming good at what you do by not knowing.


But it can't hurt :)
 
Uranium City said:
..."The Conversations: Walter Murch and the Art of Editing Film." ... "I haven't seen it...I've never really watched many films." So here is an artist participating in the creation of some of the most important films in history, probably a genius, and not much of a film buff.
Click to expand...
Very true, but if you have ever heard one of his seminars he knows his techniques and technological history extremely well.
 
I approach filmmaking as a craft rather than an art. I feel that art is something that is achieved through brilliant exercise of the various crafts involved... knowing the language of cinema is part of learning the craft.

But I've also never subscribed to the "Auteur Theory" as a filmmaking method, only as a viewing methodology (as it was originally intended by Truffaut when he penned it in "Cahier du Cinema" as a way to focus their critiques editorially). This may tinge my view of this issue.

film = art
filmmaking = craft
 
I've been reading the book BLOCKBUSTING and it has been incredible at tying together everything that is Hollywood today. I had always known about the Lumiere brothers and Thomas Edison and the perpetual debate as to who actually invented the motion picture first. This ties them all together with Eastman as he invented Kodak and why there is 35mm film, a decision that affects even digital cinema today (top end digital cameras have a 35mm sensor). Then how each of the major film companies were born from exhibitors that turned their arcades into theaters and eventually made movies themselves.

If anyone has an interest in Cinema History, this book BLOCKBUSTING is a perfect primer.
 
at OP: It's sort of important...


I hear the phrase "That's a bonnie and clyde scene" quite a bit..

and other random phrases like "this is a ___ ____ moment" and the actor says some name from the 30s or 40s which is way over my head and everyone laughs. I'm quite young for doing what I'm doing.
 
Last edited:
I feel liked I've gained a lot of insight by reading those film history books. If you already know the basics, maybe it's just more interesting in the sense of trivia or stories about how things started. But as someone who read(s) them with a complete beginner's mind, I have learned a lot.

I find that studying the history is more of learning by example rather than reading a technical manual with rules and specifications. So far, for me, that has been really helpful. :)
 
Dreadylocks said:
That's that George Lucas coffee-table book, right? I have actually been thinking about buying that...
Click to expand...

Yup. George Lucas didn't write it though. He had the idea for it and then he hired the former editor-in-chief of Daily Variety to do the actual book. It's an amazing resource and has been the best read in a few years for me.
 
ROC said:
at OP: It's sort of important...


I hear the phrase "That's a bonnie and clyde scene" quite a bit..

and other random phrases like "this is a ___ ____ moment" and the actor says some name from the 30s or 40s which is way over my head and everyone laughs. I'm quite young for doing what I'm doing.
Click to expand...

Write down what they're commenting about and go watch it. If it's made it into their vocabulary, there must be something memorable about it, good or bad. If you miss what they say, ask... the only dumb question is one that goes unasked. The fact that you're interested enough in cinema to watch the films to which they're referring will show your dedication to your craft and perhaps impress them a bit.
 
I personally find the history of many facets of it interesting and important.

The gear, techniques, innovations, writing, characters, people, successes, failures.
The moments on screen that allowed us to see us through the eyes of each other.

It’s a universal heritage that in some way has touched everyone.

I also appreciate the histories and contributions and impact of various other smaller yet undoubtedly significant areas outside of professional cinema.

Bell and Howell, Bolex and several others that helped capture the achievements and failures and moments and discoveries and heartbreaks of the human experience, that embraced the “Can do” spirit of a million launched dreams, that forever changed and empowered us in small but mighty ways.

I don’t know how important it is in general to know these things, but to forget or turn our backs on them is tragic.

-Thanks-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top