Comparative Essay
Professor Anthony Adah
Film 280/280s
27 March, 2014
Different Lenses for Russian Film Development
In “The Origins of Soviet Cinema: a Study In Industry Development” by Vance Kepley and “The Idea of Montage in Soviet Art and Film” By David Bordwell, the authors take two very different approaches to explaining the development of the Soviet film industry in the early half of the 1900s. Kepley approaches the topic with an economic perspective while Bordwell uses an artistic lens to explain how Soviet Cinema came to be. Kepley explicates that much of Soviet cinema developed out of necessity, and Bordwell explains how the Soviet film industry grew and was influenced by art.
Although the Soviet Union was cut off from importing movies from other countries, Bordwell explains that filmmakers of that time were heavily influences by Cubism, Futurism, and later constructivism. He explains that the greatest of the Soviet filmmakers at the time were much more than just film makers; they were also other kinds of practicing artists. Kuleshov himself was an established painter. They’re cinematic style didn’t just randomly develop; it was directly derived from art.
Kepley’s look back on Soviet cinema has the advantage of hind-sight; he can track the economic growths and pitfalls because they already happened. We have had time to gather data, to look back, and to analyze why the economic patterns of that government developed a strong film industry, from a film industry that was standing on its last leg. In his essay Kepley explains why the Soviet Union turned to taking their films on to the train tracks. He details that much of why Russian Cinema developed the way it did was out of necessity more than style. After the Bolshevik revolution the Soviet film Industry was at a huge cross road. They had very few production and exhibition materials, and a glaring need to be able to show the films in rural areas. “The strategy adhered to throughout War Communism…was to locate and
Film 280/280s
27 March, 2014
Different Lenses for Russian Film Development
In “The Origins of Soviet Cinema: a Study In Industry Development” by Vance Kepley and “The Idea of Montage in Soviet Art and Film” By David Bordwell, the authors take two very different approaches to explaining the development of the Soviet film industry in the early half of the 1900s. Kepley approaches the topic with an economic perspective while Bordwell uses an artistic lens to explain how Soviet Cinema came to be. Kepley explicates that much of Soviet cinema developed out of necessity, and Bordwell explains how the Soviet film industry grew and was influenced by art.
Although the Soviet Union was cut off from importing movies from other countries, Bordwell explains that filmmakers of that time were heavily influences by Cubism, Futurism, and later constructivism. He explains that the greatest of the Soviet filmmakers at the time were much more than just film makers; they were also other kinds of practicing artists. Kuleshov himself was an established painter. They’re cinematic style didn’t just randomly develop; it was directly derived from art.
Kepley’s look back on Soviet cinema has the advantage of hind-sight; he can track the economic growths and pitfalls because they already happened. We have had time to gather data, to look back, and to analyze why the economic patterns of that government developed a strong film industry, from a film industry that was standing on its last leg. In his essay Kepley explains why the Soviet Union turned to taking their films on to the train tracks. He details that much of why Russian Cinema developed the way it did was out of necessity more than style. After the Bolshevik revolution the Soviet film Industry was at a huge cross road. They had very few production and exhibition materials, and a glaring need to be able to show the films in rural areas. “The strategy adhered to throughout War Communism…was to locate and