Early Cinema

Lecture 3

Methodological Issues• Textual/formal analysis (e.g. Barry Salt, André Gaudreault)

– What are the films themselves like? What stories are told? What techniques are used?

• Economic context (e.g. Bordwell and Thompson)– Who directed the films? Who (i.e. what entity) produced/paid for the

films? How did producers fit into the industry landscape?• Cultural and social context (e.g. Tom Gunning, Charles Musser)

– What social forces were shaping or influencing filmmakers and production entities? How do cinema institutions situate themselves vis-à-vis other cultural forms?

• Audiences/exhibition context– How did audiences receive the films? Who made up film-going audiences

(i.e. what was the audience demographic)? Where did audiences see them? Under what circumstances?

“Cinema of Attractions” argument 1• Rejects three related assumptions about film history that

have long dominated its historiography ( see Tom Gunning)– 1) evolutionary assumption

• Film history is linear and evolving• Early cinema is primitive cinema

– 2) cinematic assumption• The development of cinema owes to its slow discovery of a “cinematic

essence”—that which it was destined to be• Early cinema is still beholden and imitative of other forms like theater.

– 3) narrative assumption• Cinematic essence was discovered when films fully embraced

storytelling• Early cinema had not yet embraced storytelling, therefore it is primitive

rather than different

“Cinema of Attractions” argument 2

• Dominant mode of filmmaking before 1908 is NOT a storytelling mode

• Cinema pre-1908 favors display, surprise: ”a cinema of attractions”

What is a “cinema of attractions”?

• Foregrounds the act of display– Prefers current events (i.e. topicals), scenes from daily

life (actualities: viz Lumière), performances (e.g. dances, acrobatics: “Sandow,” “Serpentine dances”), camera tricks (e.g. Hepworth, Méliès)

• acknowledges the spectator• Exhibitionist rather than voyeuristic (or diegetic

absorption)• Arouses curiosity that gets satisfied by surprises

rather than by suspense• Occurs in the present tense

FORMAL INNOVATIONS 1:FROM THE SINGLE SHOTS TO MULTIPLE SHOTS,

FROM STILL CAMERA TO MOVING CAMERA

• Single shots– Actualities, direct address, violate “the fourth wall”

• Ex: Lumière, Edison

• Moving camera (tracking and panning)– The “phantom” ride films (tracking)

• Ex: Lumière: “Leaving Jerusalem” 1896– Multi-shot “phantom” ride (tracking)

• Ex: G.A. Smith: “The Kiss in the Tunnel” 1899– Panning

• Ex: Porter: “Life of an American Fireman” 1903• Ex: Porter: “The Great Train Robbery” 1903

SINGLE SHOT: LUMIÈRE 1896

SINGLE SHOT: LUMIÈRE 1896

MOVING CAMERA (TRACKING): PHANTOM RIDESLUMIÈRE, 1896

MOVING CAMERA (TRACKING), MULTI-SHOT PHANTOM RIDE: G.A. SMITH, 1899

MOVING CAMERA (PANNING): PORTER: “LIFE OF AN AMERICAN FIREMAN,” 1903

MOVING CAMERA (PANNING): PORTER: “THE GREAT TRAIN ROBBERY,” 1903

FORMAL INNOVATIONS 2:• Multi-scene films– Shot transitions

• Dissolve– Ex: Méliès: “A Trip to the Moon” 1902

• Straight cut– Ex: Williamson: “Stop, Thief!” 1901

• Vertical wipe– Ex: G.A. Smith: “Mary Jane’s Mishap”

• Pull focus– Dream transition

» Ex: G.A. Smith: “Let me Dream Again” 1900

– Scene Dissection • Cut-in, masking, point of view shots

– Ex: G.A. Smith: “Granma’s Reading Glass” 1900• Camera repositioning

– Ex: G.A. Smith: “The Sick Kitten” 1903– Ex: G.A. Smith: “Mary Jane’s Mishap” 1903

MULTIPLE SCENES 1: TRANSITIONS: DISSOLVES: MÉLIÈS, 1902

MULTI-SCENE FILMS 1: TRANSITIONS: STRAIGHT CUTS: WILLIAMSON, “CHASE FILMS,” 1901

MULTI-SCENE FILMS 1: TRANSITIONS: VERTICAL WIPE: G.A. SMITH, “MARY JANE MISHAP,” 1903

MULTIPLE SCENES 1: TRANSITIONS: PULL FOCUS: G.A. SMITH, 1900

MULTI-SCENE FILMS 2: CUT-INS, MASKING, POINT-OF-VIEW [P.O.V] SHOTS:

G.A. SMITH, 1900

MORE MASKING, CUT-INS, AND P.O.V. SHOTS:

G.A. SMITH: “AS SEEN THROUGH A TELESCOPE,” 1900

MORE MASKING, CUT-INS, AND P.O.V. SHOTS:PATHÉ FRÈRES, “PEEPING TOM,” 1901

FORMAL INNOVATIONS 2: CAMERA REPOSITIONING: G.A. SMITH, “THE SICK

KITTEN” 1903

FORMAL INNOVATIONS 2: CAMERA REPOSITIONING: G.A. SMITH,”MARY JANE’S MISHAP”

FORMAL INNOVATIONS 3:• Multi-scene films (cont.)– Screen direction• Ex: Méliès: “A Trip to the Moon” 1902

– Mental subjectivity (rendering interiority)• Dreaming and visions

– Set within a set» Ex: Zecca: “History of a Crime” 1901

– Photographic superimposition» Ex: Porter: “Life of an American Fireman” 1903» Ex: “Mary Jane’s Mishap” 1903

– Perceptual subjectivity (creating ‘sensual impact’)• Ex: Hepworth: “How it feels to be run over” 1900

FORMAL INNOVATIONS 3: SCREEN DIRECTION: MÉLIÈS, 1902

FORMAL INNOVATIONS 3: DREAMINGSET WITHIN A SET: “HISTORY OF A CRIME”

FORMAL INNOVATIONS 3: DREAMINGPHOTOGRAPHIC SUPERIMPOSITION: “LIFE OF AN AMERICAN

FIREMAN”

FORMAL INNOVATIONS 3: VISIONSSUPERIMPOSITION: “MARY JANE’S MISHAP”

FORMAL INNOVATIONS 3: VISIONSSUPERIMPOSITION: “THE GREAT TRAIN ROBBERY” 1903