“ They never forget that the world is, quite simply, before it is something to be condemned” (pg.16).

Andre Bazin is indeed the founding father of world cinema theorization. In fact, Bazin was the first to decide he wanted to understand the influence of different world cinemas on each other. For instance, the way in which Italian Neorealism influenced the French new wave movement, Indian Cinema and the Portuguese Cinema Novo. This was revolutionary because it allowed cinema studies a holistic and much more substantial understanding of cinematic influences.

I have been reading Andre Bazin’s ‘The Evolution of the language of Cinema’ and it has some amazing revelations. These revelations inspired my interest in the long take. Bazin admires directors like Orson Welles who resisted the reliance on montage in favour of the long take. Here Bazin discusses how, specifically in Citizen Kane, Welles’ depth of field enables him to cover in on take whilst the “Camera remains motionless”(pp.60). Bazin describes how dramatic effects here do not rely on montage rather, out of the “movements of the actors within a fixed framework” (pp.60). This is interesting because it encourages you to find alternative avenues to create drama instead of solely relying on something like fast editing sequences or multitudinous camera shots. Bazin continues to discuss Welles’ work noticing that Welles’ refusal to break up the action and rather “analyze the dramatic field in time”(pg.61) offers results of which are “far superior to anything that could be achieved by the classical cut” (pg.61).

In my research of Bazin’s work I also found his written piece, ‘An Aesthetic of Reality: Neorealism’. I have always been fascinated with the blurry line between fiction and reality in cinema. Bazin’s view of this concept is fascinating and valid. Bazin discusses neorealism’s use of non-actors, rather individuals truly affected by the situations about which the films are made. I myself had never thought to use non-actors but considering it, there is a great authenticity in using non-actors, in using people who have first-hand experience.

Bazin makes a comment, which really inspires me to believe that film can capture reality. Perhaps not in the physically objective way it pretends to. In relation to the Italian Neo-Realism directors he regards, “ They never forget that the world is, quite simply, before it is something to be condemned” (pg.16). It is recognition of the world as it is, without an overhanging disappointed tone.

Bazin realized that the contemporary world views Italian Neorealism as just a series of techniques such as using non-actors and referring to social issues. He emphasizes that the authenticity is also something that is based on artifice. Every cinematic style encompasses cinematic techniques that must be recognized also.

“Every form of aesthetic must necessarily choose between what is worth preserving and what should be discarded, and what should not even be considered” (pg.20). This is something to remember when watching films, even the ones that appear most authentic. To understand the cinematic techniques utilized to create that authenticity is integral to appreciating the film for what it has achieved. Bazin references Italian Director Robert Rossellini who, in his ‘Paisa’ (1946), did not “show us everything” (pg.22) but selects and leaves things in a way that forms a logical pattern by way of which “the mind passes easily from to effect” (pg.22). Rossellini’s technique involves maintaining an “intelligible succession of events…that don’t mesh like a chain with the sprockets of a wheel”(pg.22).

Bazin sums up reality vs. cinematic reality in these two sentences: “ In the usual shooting script the fact comes under the scrutiny of the camera, is divided up, analyzed, and put together again, undoubtedly without entirely losing its factual natural but the latter presumable, is enveloped in abstraction, as the clay of a brick is enveloped by the wall which is not as yet present but which will multiply its parallelipeds. For Rossellini, facts take on meaning, but not like a tool whose function has predetermined its form. This really opened my mind to the concept of reality and how we can present it abstractly yet it still remains in essence truthful.

Studying Bazin’s theoretical work opens my eyes to the importance of understanding the history of cinematic theory. We must understand how cinema was understood through the ages and what it has developed into now because it will offer knowledge-driven inspiration we otherwise would not have.

… 🙂