Just kidding. Well, maybe. If I have to watch a cow get slaughtered one more time...
However, I did have a better experience watching this film when I was in the mindset of this class. I always like to go into a film with an open mind, and in this case, I opened my mind to how the film pushed forward. I asked myself: what did this film do? What was its motive? Its message?When watching it before, I was lost in the visual imagery of the film. For example, the clever usage of shapes to create transitions between scenes. There were also many elaborate sets that caught my attention.
There was a scene in the beginning of the film where I put more thought into. It fades into a man in boots walking backwards in the water which reveals the smokestacks of the factory. More workers start walking backwards and point at the man or behind them. This scene in particular shows that the factory has been a problem with the workers for a while. It gives background information and also the next images go on to show that the workers are conversing and talking about the conditions of the factory. I find it interesting that they are hidden behind the wheels of the factory. It makes them seem as if they are part of the machine or a part of the factory as a whole. As part one plays out, I enjoyed the superimposition linking of the secret group to their animal code names. I thought to be very revolutionary in the film world and montage helps the scene play out in a very interesting way.
This time while watching, I looked for the character placement in each scene. The way the characters act in their surroundings tells more of a story than words can. Their acting style is very Vaudeville. They ignore the camera but they know that it's there, which in my opinion causes their acting style to be more active and live. I was extremely interested around Provocation and Debacle. The characters in this scene, including "The King", are very animated and very much aware that they are on a stage. Every movement is exaggerated and their costuming works well with the film.
What I don't understand is why Eisenstein wanted his characters to act in this way, which seems childish and mocking the point he's trying to make. This is a politically charged film that showcases corruption. The greedy factory owner, at least to me, is similar to a villain on a popular cartoon or a caricature. Propaganda was also woven into this film as well, which I think is an integral part of making this film as great as it is.
With everyone's "favorite" scene, or at least the most talked about scene is the massacre at the end, As much as I hate the visuals of the slaughtering of the masses and the slaughtering of the poor cow, I think that it had to be done to show just how much pain and suffering that the Eisenstein was foreseeing for the public if something wasn't changing. This makes this film more of an avant-garde piece. Not only because of the montage and different techniques of transitioning from scene to scene, but because of the overall message that this film pushes.
After watching the film this time, I was not moved or perplexed. I was still grossed out by the cow, but I did think about how many films were influenced by this one. There are countless films now that use this montage technique or the superimposition to reveal the reasoning behind characters. If anything, I gained more respect for the film as a whole. I think a lot of Eisenstein's films, such as Battleship Potemkin, need to be watched more than once so the viewers can have a chance to take in all the information he includes in his films. I loved the acting in this film as well as the sets.
Until next time,
Sophia Broesamle
No comments:
Post a Comment