How far can a film support a revolution?

(Eisenstein, 1925)


Various factors can begin a revolution but the sustainability is what makes it worthwhile. In Soviet Russia, clashes of class systems led to a nationwide unrest resulting in a large scale revolution in 1917. The aim of the revolution was to topple the Tsarist government ending years of censorship, widespread poverty among the lower classes (Tian-Shanskaia, 1993, pp. 141) and an extreme reliance on oppression and violence to exploit as a fear tactic. After the spark of the revolution had been ignited (which many believe to be the uprising upon the Battleship Potemkin in 1905), it was the aid of Soviet Film and Cinema that helped further this movement thanks to its universal popularity and appeal.

(Eisenstein, 1925)

 It was Lenin who initiated the importance of Soviet Cinema in regards to its purpose in the Russian Revolution and how he envisioned “cinema, literature and art would strive to describe and interpret this new world” (Gillespie, 2000, pp. 90). The reasoning behind this push of Soviet Film was that it was easily understood and applicable for a wide audience to follow their message. What this meant for filmmakers was that they now had the freedom to experiment with new techniques such as the introduction of hand-held cameras to film in 1924 where cinematographer, Karl Freund, implemented this breakthrough in The Last Laugh (Davendish, 2013, pp. 8). However, most notorious of all within these cinematic experimentations, was the work of Sergei Eisenstein who took the work of Soviet montage from Lev Kuleshov and implemented it into his own features (Bergan, 2016). The purpose of soviet montage can be explained with the Kuleshov effect of how a juxtaposition of sequential shots can create a deeper meaning. Eisenstein saw this as a way of changing what it means to be a filmmaker and believing himself to be a film technician. His work with montage is clearly prevalent in his 1925 seminal film; Battleship Potemkin.

(Eisenstein, 1925)

Battleship Potemkin is a cinematic retelling of the 1905 uprising in which a group of Russian navy soldiers declare a revolution against their officers and the subsequent fallout in the town of Odessa. Eisenstein incorporated the effect of Soviet montage in order to display a wide variety of emotions during the event. In one scene where the townspeople join the soldiers in their uprising, Eisenstein implements this technique to “forcibly direct the spectator” (Taylor, 2001, pp. 82) to witness the crowd’s reactions cutting between enclosed fists to show the anger and rage building among the citizens. A clip of this effect can be seen above. Eisenstein utilises this montage effect numerous times during Battleship Potemkin but the most recognisable sequence is the harrowing Odessa Staircase scene. As word reaches the town of the rebellion staged on the seas, the Russian army intervene with violent methods, massacring innocent civilians upon the stairs. At one point in the scene, a young boy is shot and Eisenstein cuts between the mother’s horrified expression and the motionless child that is being trampled on. The purpose of this moment is not solely to challenge the audience with fresh cinematic technology but to push the atrocities of the past that can inspire the revolution to continue.

(Eisenstein, 1925)

In response to the question, as Soviet film history has proven, film can fuel a revolution significantly thanks to its popularity and focus on the importance images rather than text. Regarding film’s involvement in the Russian revolution, the endorsement from Lenin, advancement and experimentation with film technologies and focusing on pivotal and recent moments in history, meant the spirit and hope of revolution stayed fresh in the minds of the public.





Bibliography:
Bergan, R., (2016), Sergei Eisenstein: A Life in Conflict, New York: Skyhorse Publishing, Inc

Davendish, P., (2013), The delirious vision: the vogue for the hand-held camera in Soviet cinema of the 1920s, In Studies In Russia & Soviet Cinema, 7(1), pp.5-24

Eisenstein, S., (Director), (1925), Battleship Potemkin, [Motion Picture], Soviet Union: Mosfilm

Gillespie, D. C., (2000), Early Soviet Cinema: Innovation, Ideology and Propaganda, New York: Wallflower Press

Taylor, R., (2001), Battleship Potemkin: The Film Comparison, New York: I.B. Tauris

Tian-Shanskaia, O. S., (1993), Village Life in Late Tsarist Russia, Bloomington: Indiana University Press

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How does Contemporary German Film portray the past?

Image
(Becker, 2003) When the Berlin Wall fell on the 9 th of November in 1989, it signified the re-unification of Germany, a state that had been split apart since the culmination of the Second World War. Russia had relinquished their grip on East Germany meaning that Germany could form once again and celebrate their freedom as a union. Scholars criticise German film in this period at how they gloss over their past and rewrite it for themselves (Engur, 2015, pp. 145). The film in which this blog post will focus on is Wolfgang Becker’s ‘ Good Bye Lenin’ and how his motion picture addresses the changes Germany underwent soon after the collapse of the Berlin Wall. (Becker, 2003)  ‘ Good Bye Lenin’ centres around the reunification of Germany choosing to focus on a son who has to hide the truth from his mother whom has recently come out of a coma. In his film, Becker suggests that the reunification of Germany resulted in cultures merging and ways of life altering for good....
Read more

European Extreme: Art or Exploitation?

Image
The work of Lars Von Trier has been shrouded in controversy due to his frequent use of extreme violence, sex and disturbing subject matter. He even coined the filmmaking movement ‘Dogma’ to help further his and other filmmaker’s cinematic style. However, whilst many critics of Von Trier’s work claim them to be highly exploitive and solely created to shock its audience, there are some that deem it to be artistic. This final blog entry will discuss one of Von Trier’s most controversial works, Antichrist, to decide whether his 2009 film was artistic or made with the intention to provoke and anger. (Von Trier, 2009) Extreme cinema often merges two definitions of extremity. The first is that of visible extremity otherwise known as ‘bodily extremity’. This would typically include sequences of graphic births, “abortion, cannibalism, bodily waste, rape, incest, and the ingestion of urine and animals usually consumed as food in the West.” (Frey, 2016, p.125) Von Trier’s work w...
Read more