Based on the impression that Eisenstein’s essay gave me before, when I knew that Verto was a Russian filmmaker, I have got bad feeling about this essay that it would be very interesting but very difficult to understand. For me, it seems like any Russian cinematic and artistic idealism is always abstract and difficult.

I have never read a manifesto before. In Verto’s manifesto, the first word that drew my attention was “WE”. He seems to separate himself and his people from the ordinary filmmakers and I think this would be one of the Harvey’s elements- stance. Thanks to this unique writing style, I can even imagine the way he read this manifesto. We have discussed that there were many important things or more like the main points of the manifesto on Monday. “’Cinematography’ must die so that the art of cinema may live.” After I have read the whole essay, I think what Verto meant by “the art of cinema” is the ability that cinema showing the truth. And I still don’t understand what the actual meaning of “’cinematography’ must die”. How could it possible that there is not cutting, editing and any other technical things in a film? I think it certainly can film something smoothly but that would require a lot of manipulation in order to film “perfectly”. Plus, this would not be the case of showing the truth. Moreover, I think a film without cutting, without editing is like a essay without “stitching”, it would be so hard to draw people attention and people would be confused that what the most important ideas are in the essay or in the film.

Verto also said about the “cinema eye”, he said that we should not trust our human eyes because they are not perfect while the “cinema eye” is more perfect “for the exploration of the chaos of visual phenomena that fits space” ( 15). This idea is totally new and weird to me because it conflicts the thought I have as I think a filmmaker should use camera as a tool to convey his/her ideas and observation and that would be what Verto said “copy the work of our eye”.( 83, Kinoks-Revolution, Selections) I mean, I think copying from what one have seen and what one have thought or conceived about is always the main idea I have about films and their makers. I can hardly imagine what it would be like if there is no any idea behind the making of a film. The camera would be like shooting things around without any goal and the audiences would not even understand what the theme of the film is. Verto said that he wanted to become a poet and I think that’s why he wrote some parts of the essay in a poetic way and the example is the poem on page 92 of Kinoks-Revolution, Selections.

Although we have found evidences in Verto’s essay which support his ideas, I still think this essay is petty empty and it is embarrassing to say that, for me, this essay is just like a psycho talking something unrealistic and nonsense. Maybe Harvey would say that this is not a good academic essay since the evidences didn’t support the thesis well.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

5 Responses to “Comments on Verto’s ideas”

  1.   IJ Says:

    Vertov’s use of the word WE actually gave me the feeling that his stance was kind of snobbish. I think he needs to lighten up (it feels weird to say that about a dead guy) and stop with all these rules.

  2.   regiesh Says:

    I completely agree with Ikey. When I actually get my analysis (if that’s what you’d call it) up I’m planning on bringing forth this point that everyone seems to keep missing: Vertov is an elitist.

  3.   Zarraf Choudhury Says:

    I didn’t think it was snobbish, but moreorless a more thought provoking way to get our attention. Which it DID do…

  4.   maya1 Says:

    the idea of a cinema eye and that the cinema eye is perfect while the human eye can’t be trusted was totally new to me too. i liked what you said about how you felt filmmakers have always copied what they’ve seen through their eyes because how else are they possibly supposed to make a film?

  5.   Mathias Kranacher Says:

    Im kind of on the fence with Vertov using the word WE. I see Ikey’s point, that using WE makes him sound a little rude. Like hes telling us what we should do or what we should like. But at the same time, I think him using WE made it that more interesting. It made me want to read it and try to understand why Vertov keeps using it. What does he want us to get out of it?

Spam prevention powered by Akismet

Skip to toolbar